Abstract：
Wilderness medicine education is one of the fastest growing facets of both graduate and undergraduate medical education. Currently, there are curriculum guidelines for both student electives and fellowships in wilderness medicine. However, there are no guidelines for resident elective curricula. The student/resident education committee of the Wilderness Medical Society (WMS) convened a task force to develop curriculum guidelines for these electives.
A survey of previously described core wilderness medicine topics was sent to a cohort of educators involved in wilderness medicine resident electives. They were asked to rank topics on the basis of their importance of being included on a Likert scale. Multivariate analysis of medians was used to distinguish among topics to determine which topics were voted most and least necessary for a curriculum.
Of the database members contacted, 35 responded to the survey. The described current state of residency electives was that 16 institutions offered their own elective (46%). For subject preferences, multivariate analysis of scoring distribution medians demonstrated a significantly higher pattern of responses (P<0.01) for subjects with a median of 3 (must include) than for the lowest-scoring subjects that had a median of 1 (can include). Every topic was rated \"must\" by at least 1 respondent. Topics were further subdivided into an educational framework reflecting a common approach to education of wilderness medicine fellows focusing on education, leadership, knowledge, and skills.
There was a wide variety in the ranking of topics; however, there were multiple topics on which a consensus for inclusion was reached. These topics are organized and presented here as a suggested curriculum by the student/resident education committee of the WMS.
A survey of previously described core wilderness medicine topics was sent to a cohort of educators involved in wilderness medicine resident electives. They were asked to rank topics on the basis of their importance of being included on a Likert scale. Multivariate analysis of medians was used to distinguish among topics to determine which topics were voted most and least necessary for a curriculum.
Of the database members contacted, 35 responded to the survey. The described current state of residency electives was that 16 institutions offered their own elective (46%). For subject preferences, multivariate analysis of scoring distribution medians demonstrated a significantly higher pattern of responses (P<0.01) for subjects with a median of 3 (must include) than for the lowest-scoring subjects that had a median of 1 (can include). Every topic was rated \"must\" by at least 1 respondent. Topics were further subdivided into an educational framework reflecting a common approach to education of wilderness medicine fellows focusing on education, leadership, knowledge, and skills.
There was a wide variety in the ranking of topics; however, there were multiple topics on which a consensus for inclusion was reached. These topics are organized and presented here as a suggested curriculum by the student/resident education committee of the WMS.
摘要：
背景：荒野医学教育是研究生和本科生医学教育中发展最快的方面之一。目前,有学生选修课程和荒野医学奖学金的课程指南。然而,居民选修课程没有指引。荒野医学会（WMS）的学生/居民教育委员会召集了一个工作队，为这些选修课制定课程指南。
方法：对先前描述的核心荒野医学主题的调查被发送到一群参与荒野医学住院医师选修的教育工作者。他们被要求根据被纳入李克特量表的重要性对主题进行排名。中位数的多变量分析用于区分主题，以确定哪些主题是课程中最必要和最不必要的。
结果：在联系的数据库成员中，35回答了调查。所描述的当前居住选修课状态是16所机构提供了自己的选修课（46％）。对于主题首选项，得分分布中位数的多变量分析显示，中位数为3（必须包括）的受试者的反应模式（P<0.01）明显高于中位数为1（可以包括）的得分最低的受试者。每个主题都被至少一个受访者评为“必须”。主题被进一步细分为一个教育框架，反映了一种以教育为重点的荒野医学研究员的共同教育方法，领导力,知识,和技能。
结论：主题排名多种多样；但是，有多个议题达成共识。这些主题由WMS的学生/居民教育委员会作为建议课程进行组织和介绍。
方法：对先前描述的核心荒野医学主题的调查被发送到一群参与荒野医学住院医师选修的教育工作者。他们被要求根据被纳入李克特量表的重要性对主题进行排名。中位数的多变量分析用于区分主题，以确定哪些主题是课程中最必要和最不必要的。
结果：在联系的数据库成员中，35回答了调查。所描述的当前居住选修课状态是16所机构提供了自己的选修课（46％）。对于主题首选项，得分分布中位数的多变量分析显示，中位数为3（必须包括）的受试者的反应模式（P<0.01）明显高于中位数为1（可以包括）的得分最低的受试者。每个主题都被至少一个受访者评为“必须”。主题被进一步细分为一个教育框架，反映了一种以教育为重点的荒野医学研究员的共同教育方法，领导力,知识,和技能。
结论：主题排名多种多样；但是，有多个议题达成共识。这些主题由WMS的学生/居民教育委员会作为建议课程进行组织和介绍。
