Five-year MESH Core evaluation finds sustained demand for innovation training

A new study from IO Lab reports five years of experience with MESH Core, a hospital innovation curriculum for radiologists and trainees. Published in Academic Radiology, the evaluation finds improved immediate knowledge scores and high satisfaction among participants. It also describes how the course connects practical education with support for developing medical technologies.

David Liu and colleagues examined the program from 2018 through 2022. Forty residents completed the one-week course in twelve cohorts of three to six people. Small groups received instruction and practical experience in subjects such as identifying clinical needs, prototyping, intellectual property and the business decisions involved in developing a healthcare product.

Participants completed a 21-question assessment before and after the course. Median scores increased from 48% to 86%, with a statistically significant difference. The researchers also surveyed participants about their experience and confidence. Thirty-eight of forty residents provided course feedback, and all thirty-eight gave the program the highest overall rating.

The report follows the curriculum beyond its initial pilot and describes examples of alumni applying innovation skills. These include medical-device projects, an imaging company acquired by industry and a language-access application for radiology. The examples show the range of work associated with program alumni, although they cannot establish how much of each outcome resulted from the course.

The authors also describe an online version intended to make the material available more widely. By September 18, 2023, it had more than 2,100 enrolled users. Enrollment indicates reach, but it is distinct from course completion and was not the same outcome measured in the resident cohort.

The evaluation comes from one academic institution, and participation was voluntary. Residents interested in technology development may have been especially likely to enroll. The assessment measured learning immediately after the course, and the study did not establish how much knowledge persisted months later. It also lacked a comparison group and did not measure improvements in patient care.

For residency leaders, the findings provide a curriculum that has been delivered repeatedly and a record of short-term educational outcomes. Further work can examine retained skills, equitable access to training and how participants use the material over time. Those measures would help determine which elements deserve protected teaching time and what additional support trainees need when an initial idea becomes a longer development project.