Education Quantitative Assessment of a Case Based Digital Learning Curriculum for Testicular Cancer Kirtishri Mishra, Laura Bukavina, Hans Arora, and Steven C. Campbell OBJECTIVE To address information overload for trainees, a concise electronic case-based urology learning pro- gram (CBULP) was developed. Previous qualitative assessments suggested CBULP’s potential effi- cacy/utility. Herein we assess CBULP more stringently by evaluating test performance before/after reviewing a CBULP curriculum covering core concepts in testicular cancer. METHODS Eleven of 33 CBULP testicular cancer cases were strategically selected for this curriculum. A 26 question multiple-choice test was developed to assess fundamental knowledge about testis cancer tumor biology and evaluation/management. Pretest was administered to PGY4/PGY1 residents at 2 pilot urology-training programs, and medical students interested in Urology. Participants were given 4 weeks to review the curriculum and the test was then repeated. A control group (4 PGY1s) was administered the pretest and repeat test in an analogous manner without provision of the CBULP curriculum. RESULTS Twenty individuals took the pretest (7 medical students, 8 PGY1s, and 5 PGY4s), and 17 (85%) took the post-test (5 medical students, 8 PGY1s, and 4 PGY4s,). As expected, PGY4s performed significantly better than the other 2 groups on the pre- and post-test. However, sig- nificant improvement in test performance was seen across all groups that utilized the CBULP curriculum (P <.02), with highest increase demonstrated by PGY1 residents (4.75 more ques- tions correct, P = .002). The control arm did not demonstrate significant improvement (P = .20). CONCLUSION Significant improvement in test performance was observed after completion of the CBULP testic- ular series. This study suggests that CBULP can be an efficacious and clinically useful educational resource for urologic residents and students interested in the field. UROLOGY 135: 28-31, 2020. © 2019 Elsevier Inc. W ork hour restrictions have reduced time avail- able for didactics and teaching rounds, and residents are now less immersed in the field during the training experience. 1-4 Decreased time in the hospital could potentially allow for more time for trainees to read and independently develop knowledge base at home. However, an ever growing body of literature and plethora of resources has resulted in information overload, and many trainees feel overwhelmed as they try to struc- ture an individualized learning program. 5 The ideal solu- tion to this dilemma would be a readily accessible clinically-based resource that provides a concise and com- prehensive review of topics that trainees could utilized in a group or individual setting. 6,7 Case Based Urology Learning Program (CBULP) has been designed to address the issues highlighted above. In previous studies, we performed qualitative assessment of CBULP with encouraging feedback. 4,6,8 Specifically, we established that trainees, ranging from medical students to fellows, find CBULP cases to be concise, efficacious, and comprehensive enough to provide valuable information. A major limitation of earlier studies was that they were qualitative in nature, with subjective survey data reported by individual users. In this study, our objective was to design a specific topic-based curriculum (testicular cancer) and to deter- mine whether review of a strategically selected cohort of CBULP cases can improve trainees’ knowledge of basic and advanced concepts. We also aimed to conduct a more stringent evaluation of this approach by assessing pre- and postcurriculum scores among trainees, with a control arm that did not have access to the resource. We hypothesized that a CBULP based testicular cancer curriculum would provide a quantifiable improvement in knowledge base for residents in urology and students interested in the field. Financial Disclosures: None. From the University Hospitals - Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH; and the Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland, OH Address correspondence to: Steven C. Campbell, M.D., Ph.D., Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Desk Q10-1, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195. E-mail: campbes3@ccf.org Submitted: June 30, 2019, accepted (with revisions): October 1, 2019 28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.10.002 0090-4295 © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.