The Student Room Group

Pre clinical teaching

For the medical students, when pre clinical teaching was lecture based, how much of the information that you learnt did you feel was relevant and that you used later in clinical years?
Do you feel that you remembered the information after exams?
Original post by hpcp
For the medical students, when pre clinical teaching was lecture based, how much of the information that you learnt did you feel was relevant and that you used later in clinical years?
Do you feel that you remembered the information after exams?


I think most of it was pretty relevant - though that's not to say it was all massively interesting, or that you need to remember every single minute detail in order to be able to do well in clinical years.

Public health, psychology, sociology etc do all have their uses - they're just not massively fun to learn.

The pre-clinical years are pretty much the only time in med school you get to learn the basic sciences thoroughly, so it's worth learning them well in my opinion.

You end up forgetting some the scientific minutiae after exams, but eventually you gain clinical experience and become better at pattern spotting instead.

Like driving, medicine is a practical pursuit - learning the theory is all well and good, but doing it for real is another matter entirely.
Reply 2
Original post by hpcp
For the medical students, when pre clinical teaching was lecture based, how much of the information that you learnt did you feel was relevant and that you used later in clinical years?
Do you feel that you remembered the information after exams?


It has been a long time since my preclinical years so my perspective may differ. On the whole, the information was very useful and relevant to a career in medicine. The idea is to provide you with a solid foundation upon which to build your clinical acumen. The aim of the preclinical years is not to memorise and retain every little bit of detail. Let's face it, medicine isn't just about biological sciences. The world of clinical medicine has evolved far beyond that.

The learning and teaching that goes on during clinical years is markedly different. We draw on certain parts of the curriculum from the first 2 years, but most of the knowledge that was gained in the preclinical years doesn't directly translate to the clinical environment. But that's not to say that it wasn't relevant! It's all about building a solid, extensive foundation. The biological sciences that we were taught were clinically oriented and somewhat focussed, but I have to admit that I haven't had to use much of it while I'm on the wards, in the clinics, in theatre, etc.

Lecture-based teaching complements and reinforces the learning that takes place in the clinical years. I can't say I remember much of the information that I gained during my first two years of the course but it has been essential to go through all that because it builds a strong foundation so that when you learn about signs and symptoms of disease, clinical medicine, pharmacology and therapeutics etc...once you get to that stage, you'll realise that the information you learned in the preclinical phase was actually all very useful and on the while, relevant!! Don't expect yourself to remember most of it, because in fact you'll forget a lot of things, it's inevitable. But the further along you progress in your course and in your career as a doctor, you'll become more practically and clinically-minded. It all ties together :smile: before you learn about cardiology and therapeutics in cardiology, you first have to learn about the cardiovascular system, cardiac cycle...etc. That's just one example :smile:

I'm realising more and more each day that the preclinical years were incredibly valuable, especially here in my university. The course structure in the preclinical phase is fantastic.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 3
That sounds good :smile: I'm not sure whether an integrated course will suit me better so that I can link things together, like a course that links the normal side of a system, with things that can go wrong and some common conditions and treatment with a clinical placement related to that system, and works in modules like that
because as you said its really relevant clinically, to understand why a drug might work, or why a condition occurs you need to go back to the normal physiology
i'm just concerned that if there is a divide like that, I won't be able to remember the normal physiology that well, as tbh for my biology exams, I can't remember in that much detail content from the previous year!
Reply 4
Original post by Democracy
I think most of it was pretty relevant - though that's not to say it was all massively interesting, or that you need to remember every single minute detail in order to be able to do well in clinical years.

Public health, psychology, sociology etc do all have their uses - they're just not massively fun to learn.

The pre-clinical years are pretty much the only time in med school you get to learn the basic sciences thoroughly, so it's worth learning them well in my opinion.

You end up forgetting some the scientific minutiae after exams, but eventually you gain clinical experience and become better at pattern spotting instead.

Like driving, medicine is a practical pursuit - learning the theory is all well and good, but doing it for real is another matter entirely.


Sorry forgot to quote you for the above post!


Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply