Advanced search


Search results        Search results      Copy URL to E-Mail

Enhancing Transitional Support for First-Year Medical Students: An Osteopathic, Student-Centered Perspective
Hartman, T. [1]
Pookkattu, M. [1]
Dearden, S. [1]
Venkataraman, V. [4]

Journal: Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Date: 2025/12, 125(12):Pages: A722–724. doi: Subito , type of study: pretest posttest design

Full text    (https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jom-2025-2000/html)

Keywords:

educational support [1]
learning [103]
medical students [659]
osteopathic medicine [2055]
pretest posttest design [221]
programs [134]
USA [1707]

Abstract:

Context: Unanimously, it is recognized that first-year medical students are met with an extraordinarily steep learning curve to master the delicate balance of academic rigors, social stressors, and professional growth. This can challenge even the most prepared incoming students. As a result, a recent shift to focus more on supporting the transition for first-year medical students is observed. Both allopathic and osteopathic medical schools have taken their unique approach focusing on near-peer tutoring, identifying academically at-risk students, social support, stress management and developing self-directed learning skills.1-5 Each of these areas is indispensable for every future clinician, regardless of specialties. However, documentation of these skills in a first-year medical student and an assessment of the impact of the support programs is lacking. The Guided Learning Group Initiative (GLGI) was established with the long-term goal to evaluate the success of a near-peer tutoring program at Rowan-Virtua School of Osteopathic Medicine, that assists both at risk and no-risk first-year medical students in their transition with academic tutoring, social support, stress management techniques and meta-cognitive learning strategies. In this report, a preliminary analysis of two cohorts of first-year students is presented.ObjectiveTo determine the students’ perceived success in their ease of transition to the first year of medical school, the statistical significance of the perceived positive outcome in different domains will be evaluated. The null hypothesis would be that there is no significant difference between perceived positive and negative outcomes after the program. Methods: Data was collected from the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 academic years through the GLGI participant exit survey. 215 participants out of a total of 264 enrolled responded to the survey (81.4%).The inclusion criteria were as follows: participation was mandatory for those incoming students identified as needing support; participation was voluntary for other students. Voluntary participants applied during orientation following an informational session. Selection was based on advisors’ evaluation of admissions metrics (e.g., MCAT, GPA), motivation, and commitment.Participants in the 18-week program – designed within a holistic, Osteopathic framework - attended weekly 1.5-hour sessions in small groups (∼10 students) led by a peer tutor. Peer tutors were selected based on overall performance and successful first-year completion of first-year curriculum (≥82% average).The exit survey assessed participant satisfaction and perceived ease of transition. A bipolar, centered, 5-point Likert Scale questionnaire was used for analysis of the non-parametric data insix different domains. The Chi-Square Goodness of Fit test was used to assess statistical significance and evaluate the perceived success of the program (Excel 365). The Chi-square test of independence was also carried out (Prism 10.5). In this preliminary analysis, responses of “somewhat likely” and “extremely likely,” as well as “somewhat satisfied” and “extremely satisfied,” were considered positive. All other responses were grouped as negative. Additional survey items evaluated recommendations. Results: The overall perception of the GLGI was overwhelmingly positive. Chi-square analyses of the positive (n=994) vs neutral/negative (n=308) across the six domains yielded a χ2 value of 361.440 and a P-value of 1.367X10-80. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected in favor of the conclusion that the participants perceived a positive impact from the GLGI.A summary of the goodness of fit analyses of the six individual domains is provided below. In the test of independence, the null hypothesis was confirmed in every interaction analyzed with the “satisfaction” domain, except “peer tutor knowledge” (P <0.0001; Fisher’s exact test). Based on additional survey items, the students (51%) also perceived that the most valuable of the tools provided were the question sets. Further correlations and implications are discussed. Conclusion: Students perceived a positive impact from the support received through GLGI, which used a multifaceted approach: academic tutoring, social support, stress management techniques and meta-cognitive learning strategies. Students (1) believe that GLGI equipped them with the essential tools and resources, (2) are satisfied with their experience, and (3) are likely to recommend the program to another student. The results have been consistent over the two years. This holistic approach is unique among medical school tutoring programs.Future directions of this research include assessing if the perceived positive impact translates into better performance on class exams and/or feeling a more rewarding and well-rounded experience as a medical student. Further analysis will help identify critical components of GLGI that may be implemented at other medical schools.

Search results      Copy URL to E-Mail

 
 
 






  • Impressum • Legal notice • Datenschutz •


ostlib.de/data_gtkzwqjnedaybcxfmhps



Supported by

OSTLIB recommends