{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021233569261880688, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005055611729019211, 'mean_word_length': 6.173913043478261, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Education for practice: the role of practical experience in undergraduate and general clinical training

Summary. A questionnaire and interview study in two London medical schools reviewed the undergraduate curricula and house year from the perspectives of graduates one year after qualification. Data from 113 house officers (44%), obtained by questionnaire and interview, showed general satisfaction with training. However, they also saw undergraduate preparation as deficient in exposure to some practical procedures and common conditions, and several difficult communication skills were not taught. Graduates reported that they would have liked more experience as undergraduates in resuscitation, lumbar puncture, inserting nasogastric tubes, endotracheal intubation, and in managing diabetic keto‐acidosis, asthmatic attacks, myocardial infarcts and respiratory failure. The purposes of the house year and the articulation between it and the undergraduate years require clarification.