Ann Rheum Dis 1999;58:133-135 ( March )

Now and then

Guidelines for rheumatology undergraduate core curriculum

Michael Doherty,^a Anthony Woolf^b for the EULAR Standing Committee on Education and Training

^a Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, Clinical Sciences Building, City Hospital, Nottingham, ^b Duke of Cornwall Rheumatology Unit, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, Cornwall TR1 3LJ

Correspondence to: Professor A Woolf.

Accepted for publication 2 December 1998

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

	Aims of Guidelines

(1)  To provide a document for rheumatology teachers that outlines the priorities and educational areas that need to be considered when developing an undergraduate rheumatology course.

(2)  To suggest minimal standards for an undergraduate programme in rheumatology throughout Europe.

Any teaching programme may be divided into three major components: curriculum, teaching method, and assessment. The starting point, however, in terms of programme design, is the curriculum. This needs to clearly define the skills, attitudes and knowledge (that is, the alteration in behaviour) that the student will acquire by undertaking the programme. Once the curriculum is in place, and is known by both teachers and students, the most efficient teaching methods to accomplish the curriculum can be devised, as can the appropriate methods of assessment. All three basic components should interrelate and be modified in the light of regular audit, and in response to changes in medical knowledge and practice.

The . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Goh, L., Samanta, A., Cavendish, S., Heney, D. (2004). Rheumatology curriculum: passport to the future successful handling of the musculoskeletal burden?. Rheumatology (Oxford) 43: 1468-1472 [Full Text]  
• Basu, S., Roberts, C., Newble, D. I., Snaith, M. L. (2004). Comparing and contrasting undergraduate competence in musculoskeletal medicine with cardiovascular medicine and neurology. Rheumatology (Oxford) 43: 1398-1401 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Walker, D. J., Kay, L. J. (2002). Musculoskeletal examination for medical students: the need to agree what we teach. Rheumatology (Oxford) 41: 1221-1223 [Full Text]  
• Roberts, C., Adebajo, A. O., Long, S. (2002). Improving the quality of care of musculoskeletal conditions in primary care. Rheumatology (Oxford) 41: 503-508 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Aeschlimann, A, Westkaemper, R, Doherty, M, Woolf, A D (2001). Multiple choice question quiz: a valid test for needs assessment in CME in rheumatology and for self assessment. Ann Rheum Dis 60: 740-743 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kremer, J. M. (2001). Rational Use of New and Existing Disease-Modifying Agents in Rheumatoid Arthritis. ANN INTERN MED 134: 695-706 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Malaviya, A. N., Al-Jarallah, K., Al-Awadhi, A., Shehab, D. (2000). Teaching of musculoskeletal diseases to undergraduates in the Faculty of Medicine, Kuwait University. Rheumatology (Oxford) 39: 925-927 [Full Text]  
• Doherty, M., Lanyon, P. (2000). Rheumatology: What should all doctors know?. Ann Rheum Dis 59: 409-413 [Full Text]  
• WOOLF, A. D, DOHERTY, M. (2000). Education to improve the health of the nation: Who should we educate?. Ann Rheum Dis 59: 401a-403 [Full Text]