Has teaching about intellectual disability healthcare in Australian medical schools improved? A 20-year comparison of curricula audits

Table 1 Intellectual disability units taught within each department/discipline area of medicine

Department/Discipline area^a	Compulsory units (%; no. schools^b)		Elective units (%; no. schools)		Total units per discipline (%; no. schools)
	T1 n = 44 units	T2 n = 36 units	T1 n = 8 units	T2 n = 7 units	T1 n = 55^c units	T2 n = 43 units
Paediatrics	19 (43.2%; 7)	8 (22.2%; 6)	3 (37.5%; 2)	2 (28.6%; 2)	22 (40.0%; 8)	10 (23.3%; 6)
General practice	2 (4.5%; 2)	5 (13.9%; 3)	0 (0.0%; 0)	2 (28.6%; 1)	2 (3.6%; 2)	7 (16.3%; 3)
Psychiatry	5 (11.4%; 4)	4 (11.1%; 3)	2 (25.0%; 2)	0 (0.0%; 0)	10 (18.2%; 5)	4 (9.3%; 3)
Other^d	18 (40.9%; 6)	11 (30.6%; 4)	3 (37.5%; 3)	3 (42.9%; 3)	21 (38.2%; 7)	14 (32.6%; 6)
Missing ^e	–	8 (22.2%; 1)	–	–	–	8 (18.6%; 1)
Total	44 (100%)	36 (100%)	8 (100%)	7 (100%)	55 (100%)	43 (100%)

^a Department (T1), discipline area (T2). At T2, one or more discipline areas could be reported for each unit; for 8 units that had multiple disciplines areas, only the main discipline area was analysed
^b Number of schools across which the units were taught (e.g. 19 compulsory paediatric units were taught across 7 schools at T1)
^c Compulsory/elective status was unknown for 3 units at T1 for one school (all psychiatry)
^d Other departments at T1 included behavioural sciences, community medicine, geriatric medicine, public health, social and preventative medicine; other discipline areas at T2 included disability, emergency medicine, human development, professional development, sexual health, societal aspects of disability, specialist medicine, women’s health
^e Discipline area data was missing for eight compulsory units taught at one school at T2

ISSN: 1472-6920