To the top

Page Manager: Webmaster
Last update: 9/11/2012 3:13 PM

Tell a friend about this page
Print version

The specialty clinical ph… - University of Gothenburg, Sweden Till startsida
To content Read more about how we use cookies on

The specialty clinical pharmacology needs to be examined separately to guarantee a sufficient level of knowledge in medical students

Journal article
Authors Susanna Maria Wallerstedt
Mattias P. Wallerstedt
Sven Wallerstedt
Published in European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Volume 69
Issue 6
Pages 1331-1334
ISSN 0031-6970
Publication year 2013
Published at Department of Mathematical Sciences
Institute of Medicine
Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Department of Pharmacology
Pages 1331-1334
Language en
Keywords Clinical pharmacology, Device approval, Educational measurement, Internal medicine, informal curriculum
Subject categories Pharmacology and Toxicology


Purpose In medical schools small specialties like clinical pharmacology may be integrated in courses covering larger specialties and examined concomitantly. The results of a pilot study suggested that this approach would have negative consequences on the knowledge gained in clinical pharmacology with integration of this speciality in the course of internal medicine and concomitant examination. The aim of the present study was to assess in more detail whether students’ presumed tendency to study selectively influences approval (the pass mark), a surrogate marker of the knowledge gained. Methods A written examination for the integrated course in clinical pharmacology and internal medicine in Gothenburg, Sweden, was specifically designed in 2008 to evaluate the research question. The examination consisted of 50 short answer questions, of which five focused on clinical pharmacology (maximum score 10) and 45 were on internal medicine (maximum score 90). The cut-off level for approval (pass mark) was 60 %. Results Of the 81 students who wrote the examination, 73 (90.1 %) passed the examination as a whole. When the questions in clinical pharmacology were assessed separately, 62 (76.5 %) students passed the cut-off level of 60 %; the corresponding proportion of students achieving the cut-off level for questions on internal medicine was 90.1 %. There was a significant correlation between the results of the two specialties (p < 0.001), but the questions on clinical pharmacology generated lower scores (p < 0.001). The correlation coefficient between the results of two randomly chosen questions for clinical pharmacology was greater than that of two randomly chosen questions in internal medicine (p < 0.001). Conclusions Our results confirm that a small specialty like clinical pharmacology may need to be examined separately in order to guarantee a sufficient level of knowledge among students.

Page Manager: Webmaster|Last update: 9/11/2012

The University of Gothenburg uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By continuing on this website, you approve of our use of cookies.  What are cookies?