Exploration of the integration of microbiology and immunology emerging topics into undergraduate medical education

Figures & data

Figure 1. Selected emerging topics added or considered for addition to the undergraduate medical education curriculum, N = 40.

Table 1. Ranking of clinical impact or important triggers in suggesting an emerging topic warrants inclusion in undergraduate medical education curriculum (mean was calculated as the average ranking for each choice, 1 is the top choice), N = 40.

	Rank
Choice	1	2	3	4	5	Mean
Significant number of cases/deaths worldwide	24	10	4	2	0	1.6
Significant number of cases/deaths seen in region/local community	6	18	7	9	0	2.48
Newly approved treatment	5	6	21	7	1	2.83
Newly changed management guidelines	2	6	8	20	4	3.45
*Other-Open ended response	3	0	0	2	35	4.65

*Top ranked open-ended responses included: issues that affect healthcare delivery, mass media coverage, and illustrating important principles.

Table 2. Ranking of public perception or popular media coverage in suggesting an emerging topic warrants inclusion in undergraduate medical education curriculum (mean was calculated as the average ranking for each choice, 1 is the top choice), N = 40.

	Rank
Choice	1	2	3	4	5	6	Mean
It’s on the national news nightly	31	6	2	1	0	0	1.32
Local news stations are covering the topic	1	19	11	6	3	0	2.77
See regular social media posts	0	10	10	9	10	1	3.55
See commercials for new treatment or vaccine	4	2	9	14	9	2	3.7
Family members ask you about it	1	3	8	9	18	1	4.08
*Other-Open ended response	3	0	0	1	0	36	5.58

*Top ranked open-ended responses included: covered in prominent medical journals, important in the clinical media, students have not indicated much specific interest.

Figure 2. Ratings of clinical impact versus public perception in the decision to include an emerging topic in the curriculum. Due to overlapping data, the size of each point indicates the number of respondents who selected each score pair. The diagonal dashed line represents an equal rating for clinical impact and public perception with points above the line indicating that the participant rated clinical impact higher than public perception, N = 40. (survey question 10 was used for this data).

Table 3. Ranking of reasons for incorporating emerging topics into curriculum (mean was calculated as the average ranking for each choice, 1 is the top choice), N = 40.

	Rank
Choice	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	Mean
Prepare students for seeing cases in the clinic	24	7	2	3	4	0	0	1.90
Integrate basic science into other disciplines (like ethics of cost of treatment, vaccine hesitancy, public health, etc)	9	7	11	5	5	3	0	2.98
Demonstrate the importance of basic science	3	14	12	5	5	1	0	2.95
Satisfy student interest in the topic	1	6	4	10	11	8	0	4.20
Prepare students for standardized/board exams	2	6	4	7	6	14	1	4.38
Allows more basic science to be taught	0	0	6	10	9	14	1	4.85
*Other-Open ended response	1	0	1	0	0	0	38	6.75

*Top ranked open-ended responses included: help students understand and contextualize a topic in the media.

Table 4. Challenges for incorporating emerging topics in the curriculum (mean was calculated as the average ranking for each choice, 1 is the top choice), N = 40.

	Rank
Choice	1	2	3	4	5	6	Mean
Making room in an already full course or curriculum	29	4	5	1	1	0	1.52
Content overload for students	6	18	12	4	0	0	2.35
Content not covered yet on board exams	4	10	6	11	9	0	3.27
Time constraints for faculty	1	7	14	15	3	0	3.30
Curriculum committee has to approve all such changes	0	1	3	8	27	1	4.60
*Other-Open ended response	0	0	0	1	0	39	5.95

Open ended responses included: student resistance due to new/emerging topics not covered by board exam and faculty being unfamiliar with new topics.

Data availability statement

Complete survey data used/analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author on request.