Menstrual cycle abnormalities in women with inflammatory bowel disease and effects of biological therapy on gynecological pathology

In: World Journal of Clinical Cases · 2023 · vol. 11(21) , pp. 4989–4995 · doi:10.12998/wjcc.v11.i21.4989 · PMID:37583859 · W4385238158
review OA: diamond CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-08

This paper reviews the evolution of medical education since 1910, arguing that current trends are leading to a regression from Flexnerian standards, ultimately impacting diagnostic skills and research.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

The modern medical education system has gradually evolved starting from 1910 incorporating the suggestions by Abraham Flexner, his public disclosure of the poor conditions at many medical schools provided a means to galvanize all the constituencies needed for reform to occur. He could say what other reformers could not, due to their links to the medical education community. But now we are again going back to a pre-Flexnerian state due to multiple reasons such as gradually diminishing importance of basic science subjects for the students, the decline in the number and quality of investigator initiated research among clinical researchers, lesser emphasis to bedside training by means of detailed clinical examination and making appropriate observation of signs to reach to a diagnosis rather than over reliance on the laboratory tests and radiological modalities for the diagnosis, poor exposure to basic clinical skills starting from college throughout residency and the trend of disrespect and absenteeism from both theoretical and clinical/practical classes. The attitude of students is just to complete their required attendance so that they are not barred from appearing in examinations. This de-Flexnerization trend and regression to pre-Flexnerian era standards, ideologies, structures, processes, and attitudes, are bound to beget pre-Flexnerian outcomes, for you get what you designed for.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (33)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK