Training the next generation of genomic medicine providers: trends in medical education and national assessment

Shoumita Dasgupta; Gerald L Feldman; Cynthia M Powell; Helga V Toriello; Judith Westman; William G Wilson; Darrel J Waggoner

doi:10.1038/s41436-020-0855-9

Training the next generation of genomic medicine providers: trends in medical education and national assessment

Genet Med. 2020 Oct;22(10):1718-1722. doi: 10.1038/s41436-020-0855-9. Epub 2020 Jun 18.

Authors

Shoumita Dasgupta¹, Gerald L Feldman², Cynthia M Powell³, Helga V Toriello⁴, Judith Westman⁵, William G Wilson⁶, Darrel J Waggoner⁷

Affiliations

¹ Department of Medicine, Biomedical Genetics Section, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. dasgupta@bu.edu.
² Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA.
³ Departments of Pediatrics and Genetics, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
⁴ Department of Pediatrics and Human Development, Michigan State University, College of Human Medicine, East Lansing, MI, USA.
⁵ Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Human Genetics, The Ohio State University, College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
⁶ Department of Pediatrics, University of Virginia, School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
⁷ Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

PMID: 32555416
DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0855-9

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the utilization of genetics on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE®).

Methods: A team of clinical genetics educators performed an analysis of the representation of genetics content on a robust sample of recent Step 1, Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK), and Step 3 examination forms. The content of each question was mapped to curriculum recommendations from the peer reviewed Association of Professors of Human and Medical Genetics white paper, Medical School Core Curriculum in Genetics, and the USMLE Content Outline.

Results: The committee identified 13.4%, 10.4%, and 4.4% of Steps 1, 2 and 3 respectively, as having genetics content. The genetics content of the exams became less pertinent to the questions from Step 1 to 3, with decreasing genetics content by exam and increasing percentages of questions identified as having genetics content in the distractors only.

Conclusion: The current distribution of genetics in USMLE licensing examinations reflects traditional curricular approaches with genetics as a basic science course in the early years of medical school and de-emphasizes clinical relevance of the field. These observations support the notion that further integration is required to move genetics into the clinical curriculum of medical schools and the clinical content of USMLE Step exams.

Keywords: United States Medical Licensing Examination; clinical genetics; medical genetics; medical genetics curriculum; undergraduate medical education.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Clinical Competence
Curriculum
Education, Medical*
Education, Medical, Undergraduate*
Educational Measurement
Genomics
Humans
Licensure, Medical
United States