Robert Ficalora
Indiana University, Internal Medicine / Geriatrics, Faculty Member
- University of Washington, General Internal Medicine, Faculty Memberadd
Research Interests:
Chapter 15 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on cross-content areas including geriatrics, preventive medicine, women’s health, general internal medicine, quality improvement, medical ethics, palliative care, and... more
Chapter 15 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on cross-content areas including geriatrics, preventive medicine, women’s health, general internal medicine, quality improvement, medical ethics, palliative care, and perioperative medicine. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests: Psychology and Geriatrics
Chapter 3 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on gastroenterology and hepatology including colon, pancreas, esophagus, stomach, small bowel and intestine, and liver. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Chapter 14 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on dermatology including skin findings, rashes, ulcers, central nervous drug reaction, and pruritus. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 13 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on neurology including neuropathy, neuromuscular disease, central nervous system lesions, inflammatory disorders, cerebral infarction, seizure disorders, and movement disorders.... more
Chapter 13 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on neurology including neuropathy, neuromuscular disease, central nervous system lesions, inflammatory disorders, cerebral infarction, seizure disorders, and movement disorders. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 12 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on psychiatry including mood disorders, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and pharmacologic treatment. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 11 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on allergic diseases including seasonal allergies, angioedema, anaphylaxis, asthma, drug allergy, and stinging insect allergy. Full explanations are provided with the correct... more
Chapter 11 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on allergic diseases including seasonal allergies, angioedema, anaphylaxis, asthma, drug allergy, and stinging insect allergy. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests: Psychology and Allergy
Chapter 10 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on nephrology including electrolyte disorders, acid-base disorders, acute renal failure, chronic renal failure, and glomerular disease. Full explanations are provided with the... more
Chapter 10 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on nephrology including electrolyte disorders, acid-base disorders, acute renal failure, chronic renal failure, and glomerular disease. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 9 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on hematology including anemia, myeloid malignancies, coagulation disorders, and lymphoid malignancies. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests: Psychology and Hematology
Chapter 8 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on oncology including lung cancer, colon cancer, ovarian cancer, breast cancer, and prostate cancer. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 7 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on endocrinology including thyroid disease, diabetes mellitus, hypoglycemia, hyperlipidemia, obesity, nutrition, pituitary disorders, gonadal disorders, adrenal disorders, and... more
Chapter 7 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on endocrinology including thyroid disease, diabetes mellitus, hypoglycemia, hyperlipidemia, obesity, nutrition, pituitary disorders, gonadal disorders, adrenal disorders, and bone and parathyroid disease. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 6 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on rheumatologic diseases including nonarticular rheumatism, vasculitis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, antirheumatic drugs, spondyloarthropathies, and miscellaneous... more
Chapter 6 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on rheumatologic diseases including nonarticular rheumatism, vasculitis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, antirheumatic drugs, spondyloarthropathies, and miscellaneous rheumatic conditions. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 5 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on infectious diseases including travel medicine, zoonoses, bioterrorism, pneumonia, mycobacterial infections, skin and soft tissue infections, bone and joint infections, urinary... more
Chapter 5 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on infectious diseases including travel medicine, zoonoses, bioterrorism, pneumonia, mycobacterial infections, skin and soft tissue infections, bone and joint infections, urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted infections, gastrointestinal tract infections, and HIV infection. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 4 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on pulmonary medicine including critical care medicine, diffuse lung disease, occupational lung disease, pulmonary vascular disease, pulmonary embolism, pulmonary hypertension,... more
Chapter 4 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on pulmonary medicine including critical care medicine, diffuse lung disease, occupational lung disease, pulmonary vascular disease, pulmonary embolism, pulmonary hypertension, signs and symptoms, and chest radiographs. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Chapter 2 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on cardiology, including arrhythmias, clinical syndromes, cardiac physical examination, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, vascular medicine, and hypertension. Full... more
Chapter 2 presents multiple-choice, board review questions on cardiology, including arrhythmias, clinical syndromes, cardiac physical examination, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, vascular medicine, and hypertension. Full explanations are provided with the correct answers.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Since 2006, more than 7,000 individuals per year have taken the ABIM initial certification examination, and between 3,000 and 5,000 individuals per year have taken the Maintenance of Certification (MOC) examination. This chapter has the... more
Since 2006, more than 7,000 individuals per year have taken the ABIM initial certification examination, and between 3,000 and 5,000 individuals per year have taken the Maintenance of Certification (MOC) examination. This chapter has the following goals: review the content and format of the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) examination, provide strategies for preparation for the examination, and give suggestions on how to utilize techniques to improve test-taking skills.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Nursing, Emergency Medicine, Educational Measurement, Medicine, Critical Care, and 15 moreCritical Care Medicine, Prospective studies, Humans, Internal Medicine, Female, Male, Psychological Intervention, Clinical Sciences, Intensive Care Unit, Adult, Public health systems and services research, Time Factors, Intensive Care Units, Intubation, and internship and residency
To assess clinician attitudes toward biostatistics at an academic medical center. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students, internal medicine resident physicians, and internal medicine teaching faculty at Mayo Clinic... more
To assess clinician attitudes toward biostatistics at an academic medical center. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students, internal medicine resident physicians, and internal medicine teaching faculty at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, MN, in April 2005. Of 468 eligible participants, 301 (64.3 percent) responded to the survey. A total of 87.3 percent of respondents (262/300) believed it would benefit their career to better understand biostatistics, but only 17.6 percent (53/301) believed their training in biostatistics was adequate for their needs. A total of 23.3 percent of respondents (70/ 300) agreed they could identify when correct statistical methods had been applied in a study, 28.0 percent (84/300) agreed they could design their own research projects with confidence, and 14.6 percent (44/301) agreed they could conduct their own statistical analyses with confidence. Respondents with the highest self-reported level of statistical education and research experience were more likely to report these skills (all, P less than .001). A total of 92.7 percent of respondents (279/301) believed biostatistics is an important part of evidence-based medicine (EBM), and 88.0 percent (265/301) believed EBM is important for clinical practice. However, biostatistics was not evaluated as being as important as many other areas of study within medicine.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
We studied whether differences exist in evaluation scores of faculty and trainees in gastroenterology (GI) based on the gender of the evaluator or evaluatee, or the evaluator-evaluatee gender pairing. We examined evaluations of faculty... more
We studied whether differences exist in evaluation scores of faculty and trainees in gastroenterology (GI) based on the gender of the evaluator or evaluatee, or the evaluator-evaluatee gender pairing. We examined evaluations of faculty and trainees (GI fellows and internal medicine residents rotating on GI services), using mixed linear models to assess effects of the four possible evaluator-evaluatee gender pairings. Potential confounding variables were adjusted for, and random effects were used to account for repeated assessments. For internal medicine (IM) residents, no difference in evaluation scores based on gender was found. Resident age was negatively associated with performance rating, while percentage correct on the in-training examination (ITE) was positively associated. For GI fellows, the interaction between evaluator and evaluatee gender was significant. Fellow age and international medical graduate (IMG) status were negatively associated with performance rating, while I...
Research Interests:
The learning atmosphere of hospital morning report is frequently interrupted by nonurgent beeper pages to participating residents. During 176 consecutive internal medicine morning reports, 1 of the 4 chief residents at a single academic... more
The learning atmosphere of hospital morning report is frequently interrupted by nonurgent beeper pages to participating residents. During 176 consecutive internal medicine morning reports, 1 of the 4 chief residents at a single academic medical center collected and answered house staff pages during the 30-minute conference. A total of 884 pages were answered during this period. Of these, 743 could wait until after the end of morning report, resulting in more than 4 interruptions averted per session. Over half of the pages were from nursing personnel. There was no significant decrease in the total number of pages or nurse pages during the observation period. In summary, our simple system of holding intern pages resulted in a dramatic reduction in interruptions during hospital morning report.
Research Interests:
Morning report is an important conference for medical education, but direct comparisons of approaches to morning report have only rarely been reported. During the 2003 to 2004 academic year, we conducted both our traditional... more
Morning report is an important conference for medical education, but direct comparisons of approaches to morning report have only rarely been reported. During the 2003 to 2004 academic year, we conducted both our traditional single-learner-level morning report and a new highly interactive multiple-learner-level format. Attendees were rotating students, residents, and faculty on the inpatient general medicine services. We conducted anonymous surveys of participants to record their evaluations of the morning report formats. We received evaluations from 293 (60%) of 490 students, residents, and faculty. Students, 1st-year residents, and faculty preferred the mixed-learner model significantly more than did senior residents. Overall, more than 80% of participants rated the interactive multilevel format as good or very good when asked about content, discussion quality, level, and usefulness. An interactive morning report involving learners across multiple levels was well-received and has several educational benefits, with a greater emphasis on collaborative case discussion and active learning. Education leaders should remain open to experimenting with even the most well-established institutional traditions as they continuously reevaluate the effectiveness of teaching conferences.
Research Interests:
Both Streptococcus pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila are well defined causes of community-acquired pneumonia, and may be associated with substantial mortality. Optimal therapy consists of penicillin for the former organism and... more
Both Streptococcus pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila are well defined causes of community-acquired pneumonia, and may be associated with substantial mortality. Optimal therapy consists of penicillin for the former organism and erythromycin for the latter. We have presented a case of pneumonia caused by simultaneous infection with both of these agents. Organisms were recovered either from blood or lung tissue. This case carries important implications for treatment of community-acquired pneumonia, and conceivably could explain some of the mortality that continues to be seen with pneumococcal pneumonia.
Research Interests:
Clinician-educators are encouraged to engage in scholarly activity despite numerous barriers to conducting educational research. We found no reports of formal educational research groups among general internists. To evaluate a Scholarship... more
Clinician-educators are encouraged to engage in scholarly activity despite numerous barriers to conducting educational research. We found no reports of formal educational research groups among general internists. To evaluate a Scholarship in Medical Education Group (SIMEG) for general internists. The setting is a Division of General Internal Medicine at a large academic medical center. In 2005 twenty-two faculty members formed SIMEG to collaborate on educational research and award protected days for scholarly education projects. Through monthly dialogue and literature review, standards for critiquing educational research were created. A total of 63 protected days were awarded to successful applicants. SIMEG members' curriculum vitae were monitored over two years. From 2005 to 2006, SIMEG members' presentations (15 to 29; p=0.125), peer-reviewed publications (8 to 27; p=0.016) and collaborative projects (19 to 42; p=0.047) increased. Our educational research group enjoyed improving scholarly productivity over two years. Keys to success were supportive leadership, a culture of collaboration, creating a useful framework for critiquing research, and involving medical learners as co-investigators. Since faculty members are pressured to teach and care for patients while maintaining scholarly productivity, groups like SIMEG should become increasingly valued.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
To assess clinician attitudes toward biostatistics at an academic medical center. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students, internal medicine resident physicians, and internal medicine teaching faculty at Mayo Clinic... more
To assess clinician attitudes toward biostatistics at an academic medical center. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students, internal medicine resident physicians, and internal medicine teaching faculty at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, MN, in April 2005. Of 468 eligible participants, 301 (64.3 percent) responded to the survey. A total of 87.3 percent of respondents (262/300) believed it would benefit their career to better understand biostatistics, but only 17.6 percent (53/301) believed their training in biostatistics was adequate for their needs. A total of 23.3 percent of respondents (70/ 300) agreed they could identify when correct statistical methods had been applied in a study, 28.0 percent (84/300) agreed they could design their own research projects with confidence, and 14.6 percent (44/301) agreed they could conduct their own statistical analyses with confidence. Respondents with the highest self-reported level of statistical education and research experience were more likely to report these skills (all, P less than .001). A total of 92.7 percent of respondents (279/301) believed biostatistics is an important part of evidence-based medicine (EBM), and 88.0 percent (265/301) believed EBM is important for clinical practice. However, biostatistics was not evaluated as being as important as many other areas of study within medicine.