Abstract

An integrated approach to neurology is often advocated in undergraduate medical training. This involves integrating basic (normal anatomy and function) with clinical neuroscience and is believed to enhance learning. This study observes which educational opportunities medical students find most beneficial to learning and understanding of aspects of clinical neurology. Questionnaires were administered (n=163) after 4 weeks of neurology training. Students ranked on a Likert scale the degree to which various sessions had helped them to “learn and understand aspects of clinical neurology”. Sessions included were problem-based learning, expert-patient and bedside teaching, seminars and lectures (integrated), and outpatient clinics and operating theatre sessions (clinical). Comparative analyses indicated fewer students attended clinical sessions than other sessions (p<0.001§). Students reported expert-patient and bedside teaching as more helpful than outpatient and theatre sessions (p<0.001*). These sessions were also rated as more helpful than PBL (p<0.001*). There was no difference between PBL and either clinics or theatre (p=0.16*). (§χ² test, *Wilcoxon) Students valued more integrated sessions over clinical sessions. PBL was reported as less helpful than more didactic methods. This may inform future planning of undergraduate neurological curricula and resource allocation. Tailoring training to students' perceived needs may help to enhance speciality recruitment.