Health Modeling — An Innovative Educational Program for the General Medicine Specialty

Aim: to present the principles and distinctive features of the innovative educational program “Health Modeling” for the General Medicine specialty, aimed at refocusing medical training toward proactive health preservation and disease prevention.

Key points. The “Health Modeling” profile was introduced in 2023 at Sechenov University in response to the need to shift the focus of physicians’ work from treating existing diseases to effectively preventing the development of pathologies. This approach aligns with the global healthcare strategy of maintaining population health and increasing the duration of healthy life. The program seeks to equip students with a comprehensive set of competencies for preserving patient and public health using the latest advances in medical science and technology. Distinctive features of the curriculum include interdisciplinary modules structured by organ systems and a spiral progression of content, early immersion of students into clinical practice from the first year, and the translation of cutting-edge scientific knowledge into education through hands-on laboratory practicums. In the senior years, the learning trajectory is individualized, and students acquire healthcare management skills through internships in federal and regional healthcare institutions. Sechenov University is the first in Russia to implement such an integrated, organ system-based curriculum within the General Medicine specialty.

Conclusion. The “Health Modeling” educational program represents a significant step forward in modernizing medical education with an emphasis on preventive care. This model prepares a new generation of physicians oriented toward health preservation at both individual and population levels and should be of interest to medical educators and administrators seeking to update training programs in line with contemporary global health challenges.

1. Suchkov S.V., Abe H., Antonova E.N., Barach P., Velichkovskiy B.T., Galagudza M.M., et al. Personalized medicine as an updated model of national health-care system. Part 1. Strategic aspects of infrastructure. Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics. 2017;62(3):7–14. (In Russ.]. DOI:1027-4065-2017-62-3-7-14

2. Chang A.Y., Skirbekk V.F., Tyrovolas S., Kassebaum N.J., Dieleman J.L. Measuring population ageing: An analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Public Health. 2019;4(3):e159–67. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30019-2

3. GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1789–858. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32279-7

4. Federal Law of November 21, 2011 No. 323-FZ “On the Fundamentals of Health Protection of Citizens in the Russian Federation”. Strategy of Actions in the Interests of SeniorCitizens in theRussian Federation until 2025 (Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 5, 2016No. 164-r). (In Russ.).

5. National project “Demography” (approved by thePresidium of theCouncil under thePresident of theRussian Federation forStrategic Development and National Projects; protocol No. 16 of December 24,2018). (In Russ)..

6. State program “Healthcare development”(Resolution of theGovernment of theRussian Federation No. 1640 of December 26, 2017) (In Russ.).

7. Order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation No. 1177n of October 29, 2020 “On approval of the Procedure for organizing and implementing the prevention of non-communicable diseases and implementing measures to promote a healthy lifestyle in medical organizations”. (In Russ.).

8. Lutokhina Yu.A., Goncharova E.V., Pavlov Ch.S., Litvinova T.M., Volel’ B.A. Multidisciplinary consultation as an optimal way for integration of clinical disciplines and development of scientific thinking. Medical education and professional development. 2024;15(1):8–23. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.33029/2220-8453-2024-15-1-8-23

9. Panda M., Panda S., Nanda S., Panda M., Garabadu S. Traditional teaching versus integrated teaching in undergraduate medical curriculum,a comparative study. Annals of International Medical and Dental Research. 2019;5(5):5–6. DOI: 10.21276/aimdr.2019.5.5.AT1

10. Abbas S., SadiqN., Zehra T., Ullah I., Adeeb H. Comparison of performance of undergraduate medical students trained in conventional and integrated curriculums. International Journal of Academic Medicine. 2022;8(2):109–15. DOI:10.4103/ijam.ijam_112_21

11. Maizes V., Schneider C., Bell I., Weil A. Integrative medical education: Development and implementation of a comprehensive curriculum at the University of Arizona. Acad Med. 2002;77(9):851–60. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200209000-00003

12. Bandaranayake R.C. The integrated medical curriculum. CRC Press, 2022.

13. Lugg W. The biopsychosocial model — history, controversy and Engel. Australas Psychiatry. 2022;30(1):55–9. DOI:10.1177/10398562211037333

14. Snyman W.D., Kroon J. Vertical and horizontal integration of knowledge and skills — a working model. Eur J Dent Educ. 2005;9(1):26–31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0579.2004.00355.x

15. Kapitonova M.Y., Gupalo S.P., Dydykin S.S., Vasil’ev Yu.L., Mandrikov V.B., Klauchek S.V., et al. Is it time for transition fromthe subject-based to theintegrated preclinical medical curriculum? Russian Open Medical Journal. 2020;9(2):e0213. DOI: 10.15275/rusomj.2020.0213

16. Fraser S., Wright A.D., van Donkelaar P., Smirl J.D. Cross-sectional comparison of spiral versus block integrated curriculums in preparing medical students to diagnose and manage concussions. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):17. DOI:10.1186/s12909-018-1439-0

17. Bordovsky S.P., Volchkova E.A., Romanova Yu.A., Panchenko A.A., Lutokhina Yu.A., Rubtsov M.A., et al. Individual educational trajectory as a tool for developing students’ entrepreneurial competencies in medical university. Medical education and professional development. 2024;15(3):8–20. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.33029/2220-8453-2024-15-3-8-20

18. Dornan T., Littlewood S., Margolis S.A., Scherpbier A., Spencer J., Ypinazar V. How can experience in clinical and community settings contribute to early medical education? A BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2006;28(1):3–18. DOI: 10.1080/01421590500410971

19. Tayade M.C., Latti R.G. Effectiveness of early clinical exposurein medical education: Settings and scientific theories — Review. J Educ Health Promot. 2021;10:117. DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_988_20

20. Pavlov Ch.S., Kovalevskaja V.I., Litvinova T.M., Volel’ B.A. Themodels of medical education: Historical aspects, current condition and concerns. Medical Ethics. 2022;3:44–50. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24075/medet.2022.051

21. Pavlov Ch.S., Kovalevskaya V.I., Kireeva N.V., Dudnik E.N., Voronova E.I., Litvinova T.M., et al.Educational priorities and programs for the development of research competencies in science-based medical education. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2022;21(4S):3481. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.15829/1728-8800-2022-3481

22. Assessment methods in medical education. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2008;2(2):3-7.

23. Tauber S.K., Thakkar V.J., Pleshek M.A. How does thetype of expected evaluation impact students’ self-regulated learning?Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 2022;11(1):106–19.

24. Pernar L.I.M., Askari R., Breen E.M. Oral examinations in undergraduate medical education — What is the 'value added' to evaluation? Am J Surg. 2020;220(2):328–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.12.031

25.