Search

The current undergraduate radiology education predominantly integrates radiology with other disciplines during preclerkship years and is often taught by nonradiologists. Early exposure to radiology and profound understanding of scientific fundamentals of imaging modalities and techniques are essential for a better understanding and interest in the specialty. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic-related impact on in-person medical education aggravated the need for alternative virtual teaching initiatives to provide essential knowledge to medical students.The authors designed an online 7-session course on the principles of imaging modalities for medical students and fresh graduates in the United States and abroad. The course was delivered online and taught by radiologists from different US institutions. Pretests and posttests were delivered before and after each session, respectively, to assess change in knowledge. At the end of the course, a survey was distributed among students to collect their assessment and feedback.A total of 162 students and interns initially enrolled in the program by completing a sign-up interest form. An average of 65 participants attended each live session, with the highest attendance being 93 live attendees. An average of 44 attendees completed both the pretest and posttest for each session. There was a statistically significant increase in posttest scores compared with pretest scores ( P0.01) for each session; on average, the posttest scores were 48% higher than the pretest scores. A total of 84 participants answered the end-of-course survey. A total of 11% of the respondents described themselves as first year, 17% as second year, 18% as third year, 21% as fourth year, and 33% as "other." Attendees were enrolled in medical schools across 21 different countries with 35% of the respondents studying medicine in the United States. More than 76% of the respondents stated that they "strongly agree" that the program increased their understanding of radiology, increased their interest in radiology, and would be useful in their clinical practice in the future. Eighty-three percent of the respondents stated that they "strongly agree" that "this course was a worthwhile experience." Particularly, more than 84% of the respondents stated that among the most important components in enhancing their understanding of radiology were "the interpretation of normal imaging" and "interpretation of clinical cases." Ninety-two percent of the respondents stated that "the amount of effort to complete the requirements for this program was just right." Participants were also asked to rate each of the 8 sessions using the following scale: poor = 1 point, fair = 2, good = 3, and excellent = 4. The average rating for all 8 sessions was 3.61 points (SD = 0.55), which translates to 96% of the sessions being rated good or excellent. Eighty percent of the participants reported that the topics presented in the program were "excellent and clinically important to learn," and 20% of the participants reported that the topics presented were "good and somewhat important to learn." The participants were asked to evaluate their confidence regarding basic radiology skills before and after the program using the following scale: not confident at all = 1 point, somewhat confident = 2, moderately confident = 3, and very confident = 4. Figure 2 summarizes the responses of the participants.An online course to teach the fundamentals of imaging modalities could be delivered through a webinar format to medical students and interns in several countries to address the potential gaps in radiology education, therefore increasing their understanding of the different imaging modalities and their proper use in medicine.

The purpose of this study is to determine if the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening guideline for osteoporosis identifies women under the age of 65 with osteoporosis needing bone mineral density (BMD) testing. If the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) tool fails to identify women under the age of 65 with undiagnosed osteoporosis, then diagnosis and treatment are delayed, potentially leading to increased fractures and morbidity. Another aim of this study is to characterize women under the age of 65 with osteoporosis that FRAX fails to identify and provide descriptive data on our study population. A retrospective chart review was completed between 2012 and 2018. We extracted data for 113 women ≤ 65-years with osteoporosis confirmed by BMD or fractures. Major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) risk calculation without BMD by FRAX of 9.3% or greater (high risk group) was found in 51 (45.1%) of patients. Osteoporosis by T-score < 2.5 was evident in 102 (90%) of patients. Previous osteoporotic fractures were noted in 29 (25.7%) of patients. The average age of women in the high-risk group was 58 years and 55 years in the low-risk group. The sensitivity of FRAX for identifying women with a T-score

Objectives: Radiology and medical imaging are important yet often an underrepresented facet of medical education. Notably, there is concern among radiologists that students do not receive enough radiology exposure and that they struggle to interpret image findings on entering residency. Therefore, this survey aims to identify how medical students perceive the radiology curriculum and to determine gaps in delivery. Material and Methods: Students were recruited from United States (US) medical schools and given a 21-question survey assessing their perception of the radiology curriculum as well as asking about their confidence levels regarding medical imaging. The inclusion criteria were age >18 and enrolled in US medical school. The surveys were completed in April–July 2020 by students across the US. Objective parameters were measured as percentage correct, while subjective parameters used a 4-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 472 medical students across 31 medical schools completed the surveys with a response rate of 69%. Responses represented all class years within medical schools and showed equal distribution among the future career plans. Students responded that didactic lectures were the most common teaching method and that radiologists were their primary teachers during preclinical education. Students were unfamiliar with the American College of Radiology appropriateness criteria with 65% responding they had never heard of it and 33% reporting that they have heard of it but never used it. In assessing students’ perceptions of radiology education, 72% of students responded that they received too little, and 28% of students responded, “Just right.” Conclusion: Radiologists are increasing their educational representation in medical school curricula. Despite this, radiology continues to be under-represented with students desiring more exposure to medical imaging. Integrating the student’s perceptions with existing curricula suggests that efforts should focus on increasing awareness of which studies are appropriate and teaching students how to systematically interpret an image.

The United States Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) recommends bone mineral density (BMD) screening for osteoporosis in women under the age of 65 by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) if their risk of a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) is greater or equal to that of an average 65-year-old woman without risk factors for osteoporosis.(1) The absolute risk of a MOF is calculated using the FRAX ®, a tool that incorporates various risk factors to calculate risk with or without the addition of BMD of the femoral neck as a variable. Those, without the BMD variable, having a calculated 10-year risk of a MOF of 9.3% or greater are recommended for BMD testing. A retrospective chart review was completed for patients between 2012 to 2018. We identified 128 charts and analyzed the extracted data for 113 women < 65-years with osteoporosis confirmed by BMD or fractures. MOF fracture risk calculation without BMD by FRAX of 9.3% or greater were found in 51 (45.1%) patients. Osteoporosis by T-score = 9.3%) and low-risk (FRAX< 9.3%). The average age of women in the high-risk group was 58 years and 55 years in the low-risk group. In the high-risk group, 88.2% were Caucasian, 11.8% Hispanic, 0% African American, 0% Asian. In the low risk group, 59.7% were Caucasian, 32.3% Hispanic, 3.2% African American, 4.8% Asian. Women with MOF >9.3% were older, had more years post menopause, and had more risk factors (average 2.18 factors vs 0.61) than women with MOF