Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Overview
A. The guidelines for this competition are adopted from those provided by the APMC-SN
National Academics and Research Committee.
B. Participating teams will be provided a clinical case from which they are to make a seven-
minute presentation to analyze and deduce the case and arrive at logical differential
diagnoses and a theorized explanation of the case.
C. The winning team shall represent the school in the upcoming Clinico-Pathologic Case
Competition of the Regional APMC-SN Convention.
GUIDELINES
I. Eligibility Rules
A. The competition is open to all enrolled students of MMSU-COM.
B. Each team shall be composed of four (4) duly enrolled medical students.
C. Medical student participants may be composed of students from any year level with the
exception of medical interns or post-graduate interns.
D. The members of the team shall be designated as Presenter (1), Alternate Presenter (1),
and Supporting Members (2).
JUDGE: ______________________________________________________________________
Note: The detailed breakdown of scores is prescribed for guidance but judges may opt to judge
differently provided that the breakdown of points for each major category is retained.
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Strongly
Average
Agree
Agree
1. CONTENT
The pertinent information of the case was clearly presented and 2 4 6 8 10
thoroughly processed (10 points)
Differential diagnoses were based on sound analysis of available 2 4 6 8 10
information (10 points)
Differentials were of sufficient breadth and coverage (10 points) 2 4 6 8 10
Final diagnosis reflected depth of analysis, sound judgment, and is 2 4 6 8 10
supported by noted observations and literature (10 points)
Proposed pathophysiology was comprehensive (10 points) 2 4 6 8 10
Presenters made effective use of pertinent literature (5 points) 1 2 3 4 5
(Maximum: 55) Subtotal
2. MASTERY (QUESTION & ANSWER)
The group was able to provide logical and substantial answers to 2 4 6 8 10
the questions (10 points)
Answers demonstrated mastery of the position taken (5 points) 1 2 3 4 5
Answers were consistent with the presentation given (5 points) 1 2 3 4 5
Answers to questions contributed significantly to the proposed 1 2 3 4 5
diagnosis and explanation of the case (5 points)
(Maximum: 25) Subtotal
3. PRESENTATION
The presentation was concise, well-organized and logically- 1 2 3 4 5
sequenced (5 points)
The presentation was coherent and well-understood (5 points) 1 2 3 4 5
The presenter was able to connect with the audience during the 1 2 3 4 5
presentation (5 points)
The presenter used presentation visuals to great effect (5 points) 1 2 3 4 5
(Maximum: 20) Subtotal
(Maximum: 100) TOTAL