by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Chiropractic Journal of Australia : CJA December 2013
Chiropractic Journal of Australia Volume 43 Number 4 December 2013 141 Secondly the initial exam results for both years were based on full compulsory participation within a formal university examination setting. Our study was voluntary and the participation rate was 72.5% after exclusion criteria were applied. The drop in participation may have skewed the results. Another limitation to this study is the short retention interval of one year; long term extrapolations cannot be made. Extrapolation of data allows for a better correlation and understanding of the nature of knowledge retention loss and the rate at which it occurs in a clinically relevant cohort. This study was designed to be a basis for future research into the retention of knowledge in chiropractic students. Future studies can look into the retention of neuroanatomy over longer retention intervals, and the relationship between knowledge retention and curriculum structure. CONCLUSION The result of this study demonstrated a better retention of neuroanatomy knowledge by chiropractic students compared to other students, as published in the current literature. This was especially the case in the cohort of master's students who were using and applying the knowledge gained the previous year. These results support the notion that knowledge is retained better when it is relevant and is applied to or used in other settings, including the clinical setting. Further research is needed to see whether this applies to extended retention periods, and to investigate the relationship amongst retention, teaching methods and course structure. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank Reidar Lystad for his help in the statistical analysis and Aron Downie for allowing the distribution of the questionnaires in tutorial time. The authors have no conficts of interests and no commercial or fnancial relationships to disclose. REFERENCES 1. Nolte J. The human brain: an introduction to its functional anatomy. St. Louis (Mo): Mosby; 2002. 2. Levine LJ, Pizarro DA. Emotion and memory research: a grumpy overview. Soc Cogn. 2004;22(5):530-54. NEUROANATOMY RETENTION McCOY et al 3. Schwartz B, Son L, Kornell N, Finn B. Four principles of memory improvement: A guide to improving learning effciency. The Interna- tional Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving. 2011;21(1):7-15. 4. Saffran M, Kennedy WB, Kelly Jr PR. Use of National Board Ex- aminations to estimate retention of Biochemistry. Biochem Educ. 1981;9(3):97-9. 5. Last KS, Appleton J, Ferguson DB, Stevenson H. The value of a questionnaire in assessing the acquisition and retention of basic science knowledge by dental students. Eur J Dent Educ. 2000 2000;4(1):3- 9. 6. Cheifetz RE, Phang PT. Evaluating learning and knowledge retention after a continuing medical education course on total mesorectal exci- sion for surgeons. Am J Surg. 2006;191(5):687-90. 7. Macchi V, Porzionato A, Stecco C, Parenti A, De Caro R. Clinical neuroanatomy module 5 years' experience at the School of Medicine of Padova. Surg Rad Anat. 2007 Apr (Epub 2007 Mar 2007;29(3):261- 7. 8. D’Eon MF. Knowledge loss of medical students on frst year basic science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC Med Educ. 2006;6:5-5. 9. Mateen FJ, D'Eon MF. Neuroanatomy: a single institution study of knowledge loss. Med Teach. 2008;30(5):537-9. 10. Custers EJFM. Long-term retention of basic science knowledge: a review study. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010;15(1):109- 128. 11. Levine HG, Forman PM. A study of retention of knowledge of neu- rosciences information. Acad Med. 1973;48(9):867-9. 12. Billings-Gagliardi S, Mazor KM. Effects of review on medical stu- dents' recall of different types of neuroanatomical content. Acad Med. 2009 2009;84(10 Suppl):S34-37. 13. Nairne J, Pandeirada J. Forgetting. Learning and memory: A compre- hensive reference. 2008;2:179-94. 14. Bethe A. Kritische Betrachtungen über den Vorklinischen Unterricht. Klin Wochenschr. 1928;7(31):1481-3. 15. Cole L. What is wrong with the medical curriculum? VIII. The Lancet, 1932;110(July 30), 253--4. 16. Swanson DB, Case SM, Luecht RM, Dillon GF. Retention of basic science information by fourth-year medical students. Acad Med. 1996;71(10):S80-82. 17. Custers EJ, ten Cate OT. Very long-term retention of basic science knowledge in doctors after graduation. Med Educ. 2011;45(4):422- 30. 18. Sweller J, van Merrienboer JG, Paas FWC. Cognitive Architec- ture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review. 1998;10(3):251-96. 19. Moss E. Multiple choice questions: their value as an assessment tool. Curr opin anaesthesiol. 2001;14(6):661-6.
CJA September 2013