Pros and cons of shortening medical school discussed

Pros and cons of shortening medical school discussed
The pros and cons of shortening medical school to three years are discussed in two perspective pieces published in the Sept. 19 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine

(HealthDay)—The pros and cons of shortening medical school to three years are discussed in two perspective pieces published in the Sept. 19 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

Steven B. Abramson, M.D., from the New York University Langone Medical Center in New York City, and colleagues discuss the benefits of shortening to three years, citing the example of fast-track programs currently offered at some institutions. Benefits of shortened training include allowing graduates to enter practice sooner and increase the physician-years in practice, helping to address the physician shortage. In addition, the three-year pathway could reduce the student , by simultaneously reducing debt and also providing an additional year of earnings. Careful mentoring and monitoring is recommended for the success of a shortened training program.

Stanley Goldfarb, M.D., and Gail Morrison, M.D., from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, discuss the potential shortcomings of shortening medical school. The authors note that, although exceptional may be capable of accelerated learning, for typical students, the duration of medical school should not be reduced. Past efforts to reduce the duration of medical school have been aborted; students and faculty felt pressured by the compression of the material. Students who completed medical school in three years reported feeling exhausted, and many extended their studies. Students should be better prepared for the transition to residency; the current fourth-year curriculum fails to prepare students for more advanced responsibilities and should focus on expanding clinical and non-.

"Given the growing complexity of medicine, it seems counterproductive to compress the curriculum into three years, reducing both preclinical and clinical experiences," Goldfarb and Morrison write.

More information: Full Text - Abramson
Full Text - Goldfarb and Morrison

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Growing mismatch in med school graduates, GME places

Jun 25, 2013

(HealthDay)—Although the number of medical school enrollees and graduates is increasing, the number of U.S. graduate medical education (GME) programs has not increased at the same rate, and consequently ...

Online dermatology education effective among students

Aug 24, 2013

(HealthDay)—An online dermatology curriculum significantly improves dermatology knowledge among medical students taking an introductory dermatology clerkship, according to research published in the August ...

Enrollment in US medical colleges is increasing

May 29, 2013

(HealthDay)—Enrollment in U.S. medical colleges is increasing, but there is concern about the adequacy of training opportunities, according to a report published by the Association of American Medical Colleges ...

Recommended for you

Were clinical trial practices in East Germany questionable?

16 hours ago

Clinical trials carried out in the former East Germany in the second half of the 20th century were not always with the full knowledge or understanding of participants with some questionable practices taking place, according ...

Schumacher's doctor sees progress after injury

Oct 23, 2014

A French physician who treated Michael Schumacher for nearly six months after the Formula One champion struck his head in a ski accident says he is no longer in a coma and predicted a possible recovery within three years.

User comments