
CBME: Community Based
Medical Education
Medical education most commonly occurs within universities and
tertiary teaching hospitals. Evidence is emerging that a community
setting may provide students with a better medical education during
the clinical years of their training.
The material presented here seeks to analyse the strengths and
weaknesses of educating doctors in a community setting. It explores
the role of clinical, institutional, social and personal relationships
in developing a framework for describing quality in community-based
undergraduate medical education.
It describes four key relationships, the four Rs,
in which the medical student must be immersed to facilitate high
quality learning. These four Rs are the relationships
between
- clinicians and patients
- health service and university research
- government and community
- personal principles and professional expectations.
This model is proposed as a valid framework for articulating
the important principles in CBME, and describes why community-based
medical education is such an attractive alternative. Relationships
do matter!
These relationships are represented by the four intersecting
axes of the diagram:
- The Clinical axis:
Clinician - (Student) - Patient
- The Institutional axis:
Health Service - (Student) - University Research
- The Social axis:
Community - (Student) - Government
- The Personal axis:
Personal Principles - (Student) - Professional Practice
These axes are interdependent. The quality of the
whole is more than the sum of the parts when they are integrated
with integrity.
Click the coloured sections of the diagram
to further explore each axis.
This material is based on two papers by Prof Paul
Worley which themselves draw on the wisdom and hard work of many
other researchers in the field of medical education.
- Relationships: A New Way to Analyse Community-based Medical
Education? (Part 1)
Education for Health, Vol.15, No. 2, 2002, 117-128 (on-line)
- Integrity: The Key to Quality in Community-based Medical Education?
(Part 2)
Education for Health, Vol.15, No. 2, 2002, 129-138 (on-line)
|