A therapeutic intervention for an ailing medical education: The values prism model as proof of concept.

PURPOSE: To articulate proof of concept in relation to a complex pedagogical values intervention for a range of medical education's historically accumulated symptoms. METHODS: Using a discursive approach, symptoms that hinder development of medical education are set out. Such symptoms rest with the instrumentality of current pedagogical approaches, supressing potential. A 'cure' is articulated - that the dominant values complex of instrumentalism is raised in quality through embracing ethical, aesthetic, political, and transcendental (meaning) values. Key to this is the use of language in clinical encounters, where the productive metaphor count is repressed in instrumental-technical approaches but multiplied in embracing other values and qualities. This 'Values Prism' model shows instrumentalism passing through an expansive educational prism to create expansion in types and qualities. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Proof of concept is achieved. The Values Prism model can be adapted for any undergraduate medicine curriculum as a process model - a set of values that permeate the curriculum beyond the dominant instrumental. The enhanced and expanded curriculum acts in a translational capacity.

As 'synapses' become 'protoplasmic kisses': Symmetry across clinical reasoning and poetry.

CONTEXT: We argue that biomedicine at root is not primarily instrumental, but shares aesthetic, ethical and political values with poetry. Yet an instrumentalist bias in medical pedagogy can lead to frustration of biomedicine's potential. Such unfulfilled potential is exposed when making a comparison with poetry, a knowledge system that expressly engages a range of value systems. How then to recover biomedical language's riches for medical education's gain? METHODS: We combine scientific and artistic approaches by positing a common frame to which both medicine and poetry can aspire: the 'high-water mark' of language. Poetry's language is complex, intensive and connotative-concerned with mood, ambiguity, metaphor and embodiment. Biomedicine potentially engages with such linguistic complexities, particularly in metaphor production, yet persistently falls away from this high-water mark of language, reducing connotative language to denotation or literal meanings. We describe such instances of frustrated potential as 'trying to accelerate with the brake on'. This paradoxical state has become habitual in medical education. The resultant lack of productive metaphor insulates pedagogy from mood, separating it from the vernacular as a specialist tongue that ensures identification with the medical community of practice. Such language can alienate both patients and poets for the same reason: it is less human than technical. CONCLUSIONS: Using the example of clinical reasoning and attendant diagnostic work, we show that reductions from the connotative to the denotative not only mask but also contradict the complexity of implicit, embedded and distributed cognitive structures, creating a tension that medical education consistently fails to either resolve or draw upon as a resource. Further, poetry too has a complex set of implicit rules and formative structures that shape composition. These structures show symmetry, correspondence or even isomorphism with medical cognition, where both can aspire to activity that is aesthetically rich, intense and cognitively elegant.

Empathy across cultures - one size does not fit all: from the ego-logical to the eco-logical of relational empathy.

Empathy is extolled in Western healthcare and medical education as an exemplary quality to cultivate in trainees and providers. Yet it remains an elusive and inadequately understood attribute. It posits a "one size fits all" unidimensional attribute applicable across contexts with scant attention given to its multifaceted dimensions in intercultural contexts. In this article, we uncloak the shortcomings of this conventional empathy in intercultural settings, and instead propound an expanded "relational empathy".

Re-visioning clinical reasoning, or stepping out from the skull.

THE PROBLEM: Progress in teaching and learning clinical reasoning depends upon more sophisticated modelling of the reasoning process itself. Current accounts of clinical reasoning, grounded in experimental psychology, show a bias towards situating reasoning inside the skull, further reduced to neural processes signified by imaging. Such a model is necessary but not sufficient to explain the clinical reasoning process where it fails to embrace cognition extended to the environment and social contexts. A SOLUTION: Sufficiency for a model of clinical reasoning must include dialogues between doctor, patient, and colleagues, including the complex influences of history and culture, where artefacts and semiotics such as computers, testing, and narrative structures augment cognition. Here, 'extended' cognition is configured as an outside-in process of 'sensemaking' or 'adaptive expertise'. THE FUTURE: Current 'predictive processing' cognition models place emphasis on anticipatory cognition, where memory is reconfigured as active reconstruction rather than recall and recognition. Such an 'ecological perception' or 'externalistic' model provides a counter to the current dominant paradigm of 'ego-logical' cognitive reasoning - the latter, again, abstracted from context and located inside the skull. New models of clinical reasoning as an open, dynamic, nonlinear, complex system are called for.

Where medical education meets artificial intelligence: 'Does technology care?'

'COLD' TECHNOLOGIES AND 'WARM' HANDS-ON MEDICINE NEED TO WALK HAND-IN-HAND: Technologies, such as deep learning artificial intelligence (AI), promise benign solutions to thorny, complex problems; but this view is misguided. Though AI has revolutionised aspects of technical medicine, it has brought in its wake practical, conceptual, pedagogical and ethical conundrums. For example, widespread adoption of technologies threatens to shift emphasis from 'hands-on' embodied clinical work to disembodied 'technology enhanced' fuzzy scenarios muddying ethical responsibilities. Where AI can offer a powerful sharpening of diagnostic accuracy and treatment options, 'cold' technologies and 'warm' hands-on medicine need to walk hand-in-hand. This presents a pedagogical challenge grounded in historical precedent: in the wake of Vesalian anatomy introducing the dominant metaphor of 'body as machine,' a medicine of qualities was devalued through the rise of instrumental scientific medicine. The AI age in medicine promises to redouble the machine metaphor, reducing complex patient experiences to linear problem-solving interventions promising 'solutionism.' As an instrumental intervention, AI can objectify patients, frustrating the benefits of dialogue, as patients' complex and often unpredictable fleshly experiences of illness are recalculated in solution-focused computational terms. SUSPICIONS ABOUT SOLUTIONS: The rate of change in numbers and sophistication of new technologies is daunting; they include surgical robotics, implants, computer programming and genetic interventions such as clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR). Contributing to the focus of this issue on 'solutionism,' we explore how AI is often promoted as an all-encompassing answer to complex problems, including the pedagogical, where learning 'hands-on' bedside medicine has proven benefits beyond the technical. Where AI and embodied medicine have differing epistemological, ontological and axiological roots, we must not imagine that they will readily walk hand-in-hand down the aisle towards a happy marriage. Their union will be fractious, requiring lifelong guidance provided by a perceptive medical education suspicious of 'smart' solutions to complex problems.

Embracing ambiguity: Curriculum design and activity theory.

A curriculum innovation for a new UK medical school - Peninsula, launched in 2002 - was grounded in a period of radical pedagogical innovation in medical education in the UK during the 1990s. Part of this thinking was to include the medical humanities as a medium for re-thinking medical practice, especially how medical students might better learn to communicate with patients and colleagues, and how they might become agents of change in progressing medicine through innovations. In designing the curriculum, Cultural-historical Activity Theory (CHAT) was used as a model to 'think', or reconceptualise, the purposes of a curriculum. The first question asked was: 'what do patients want?' Emphasis was placed on resisting a 'will-to-stability' in adopting safe curriculum process, in favour of adopting a 'possibility knowledge' framework that celebrated dialogue. This operated through three 'spearheads', or radical aims: democratic habits, towards the feminine, and tender-mindedness.

Embracing the collective through medical education.

The journal Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice has, under Geoff Norman's leadership, promoted a collaborative approach to investigating educationally-savvy and innovative health care practices, where academic medical educators can work closely with healthcare practitioners to improve patient care and safety. But in medical practice in particular this networked approach is often compromised by a lingering, historically conditioned pattern of heroic individualism (under the banner 'self help'). In an era promising patient-centredness and inter-professional practices, we must ask: 'when will medicine, and its informing agent medical education, embrace democratic habits and collectivism?' The symptom of lingering heroic individualism is particularly prominent in North American medical education. This is echoed in widespread resistance to a government-controlled public health, where the USA remains the only advanced economy that fails to provide universal health care. I track a resistance to collectivist medical-educational reform historically from a mid-nineteenth century nexus of influential thinkers who came, some unwittingly, to shape North American medical education within a Protestant-Capitalist individualist tradition. This tradition still lingers, where some doctors recall a fictional 'golden age' of medical practice and education, actually long since eclipsed by fluid inter-professional health care team practices. I cast this tension between conservative traditions of individualism and progressive collectivism as a political issue.

Invoking the Medical Humanities to Develop a #MedicineWeCanTrust.

Trust is a complex phenomenon that resists easy definition, but it is easily recognizable, or rather its absence is impossible to miss. The author draws inspiration from the #MedsWeCanTrust movement to advocate for #MedicineWeCanTrust. Trust can be seen as a "soft," "tender-minded," optimistic condition fighting for survival in a "hard," "tough-minded," or jaundiced medicine. Modern medicine is traditionally patriarchal, individualistic, and resistant to encouraging democratic, collaborative habits as it socializes its young into hierarchical structures or eats them whole. Yet trust is a health intervention and essential for the innovative expansion of medical culture as it encourages authentic democracy, interprofessional clinical teamwork, and patient-centeredness. Increases in trust lead to greater tolerance of uncertainty, one of the primary goals of medical education. Recent curriculum development work has shown that the medical humanities offer a superb delivery mechanism for ensuring democratic habits in medicine that align with social justice agendas, key to addressing links between social inequalities and compromised physical and mental health. Where lack of trust is associated with cynicism in doctors, increasing trust loosens dependence upon suffocating control mechanisms. This allows medicine to take on the moral concerns and uncertainties of an adulthood that also promises emotional warmth, guidance, support, and improved communication between colleagues and with patients. Medicine must embrace trust as the matrix of health care, and the medical humanities can educate for values such as tolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity as a basis for engendering trust.

Force and Presence in the World of Medicine.

Medicine can not only be read with a poetic imagination, but also configured as a poetic practice, moving beyond the instrumental. The poet Wallace Stevens made a distinction between 'Force' and 'Presence'-the former can be read as combative, the latter as pacific. Modern medicine has been shaped historically by the combative metaphor of a 'war against disease', turning medicine into a quasi-militaristic culture fond of hierarchy. This is supplemented by the metaphor of the 'body as machine', reducing the complex and unpredictable body to a linear, if complicated, apparatus. The two metaphors align medicine with the modern industrial-military complex that is masculine, heroic, and controlling in character. In an era in which medicine is feminising and expected to be patient-centred, collaborative (inter-professional) and transparent to the public as a democratic gesture, the industrial-military metaphor complex should no longer be shaping medicine-yet its influence is still keenly felt, especially in surgery. This continuing dominance of Force over Presence matters because it is a style running counter to the collaborative, team-based medicine needed for high levels of patient safety. Medicine will authentically democratise only as new, pacific shaping metaphors emerge: those of 'Presence', such as 'hospitality'. Hospitals can once again become places of hospitality.

The Perils and Rewards of Critical Consciousness Raising in Medical Education.

Inequalities in society are reflected in patterns of disease and access to health care, where the disadvantaged suffer most. Traditionally, doctors have kept politics out of their work, even though politics often shape medicine. What political responsibilities, then, should doctors have as they facilitate the learning of medical students? The article in this issue by Kumagai, Jackson, and Razack goes straight to the heart of this question. These authors ask whether educators should be wary of "cutting close to the bone" in discussing issues that may restimulate trauma in some medical students.Kumagai and colleagues suggest that it is actually the ethical responsibility of educators to introduce students to discomfort as a means of raising students' critical consciousness or their ability to sensitively gauge the positions of others and to engage in dialogue to address issues such as inequality and inequity so that previously silent and silenced voices can be heard. The author of this Commentary expands on this argument, further supporting the need to democratize medical culture and politicize doctors. Educators, as expert facilitators of this new critical consciousness raising, must create safe spaces for students to work through issues to avoid educational iatrogenesis. Such an approach to medical education is an extension of the traditional art of medicine, at the core of which are patient care and tolerance. Ethics, aesthetics, and politics can come together in such a reflexive medicine curriculum.

What would you ideally do if there were no targets? An ethnographic study of the unintended consequences of top-down governance in two clinical settings.

Top-down policy directives, such as targets and their associated protocols, may be driven politically rather than clinically and can be described as macro-political texts. While targets supposedly provide incentives for healthcare services, they may unintentionally shape practices of accommodation rather than implementation, deflecting practitioners from providing optimal care. Live work activities were observed for two six months periods in a UK NHS Emergency Department and a Mental Health Ward using video and field notes ethnography, with post hoc unstructured interviews for clarification and verification. Sixty-four practitioners were consented. Data were treated as narratives, analysed thematically and theorised using cultural-historical activity theory. The ideal text of patient-centred team working shaped by top-down, politically inspired targets was disrupted, where targets produced unintended consequences. Bottom-up strategies of making meaning of targets in a local context generated sub-texts of resistance, rationalization, and even duplicity that had paradoxical positive effects in generating collaboration and democratic habits. Throughput pressures generated both cross-team conflicts and intra-team identification. What practitioners actually do to make sense of top-down directives is not the same as the ideal expectation framed by targets. Team members pulled together not because of targets but in spite of them, and as a form of resistance to governance. Targets produce unnecessary stress as team members focus on throughput rather than quality of care. Those governing healthcare must look at the unintended consequences of targets.

Whistleblowing in medicine and in Homer's Iliad.

'Thinking with Homer', or drawing creatively on themes and scenes from Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, can help us to better understand medical culture and practice. One current, pressing, issue is the role of the whistleblower, who recognises and exposes perceived poor practice or ethical transgressions that compromise patient care and safety. Once, whistleblowers were ostracised where medical culture closed ranks. However, in a new era of public accountability, medicine looks to formally embrace whistleblowing to the point that not reporting transgressions can now constitute a transgression of professionalism. Where medical students identify with the history and traditions of medical culture, they inevitably find themselves in situations of conflicting loyalties if they encounter senior clinicians behaving unprofessionally. What are the implications of facing these dilemmas for students in terms of role modelling and shaping of character as a doctor, and how might a study of Homer help with such dilemmas? We suggest that a close reading of an opening scene in Homer's the Iliad can help us to better appreciate such ethical dilemmas. We link this with the early Greek tradition of parrhesia or 'truth telling', where frankly speaking out against perceived injustice is encouraged as resistance to power and inappropriate use of authority. We encourage medical educators to openly discuss perceived ethical dilemmas with medical students, and medicine as a culture to examine its conscience in a transition from an authoritarian to an 'open' society, where whistleblowing becomes as acceptable and necessary as good hygiene on the wards.

Seven Types of Ambiguity in Evaluating the Impact of Humanities Provision in Undergraduate Medicine Curricula.

Inclusion of the humanities in undergraduate medicine curricula remains controversial. Skeptics have placed the burden of proof of effectiveness upon the shoulders of advocates, but this may lead to pursuing measurement of the immeasurable, deflecting attention away from the more pressing task of defining what we mean by the humanities in medicine. While humanities input can offer a fundamental critical counterweight to a potentially reductive biomedical science education, a new wave of thinking suggests that the kinds of arts and humanities currently used in medical education are neither radical nor critical enough to have a deep effect on students' learning and may need to be reformulated. The humanities can certainly educate for tolerance of ambiguity as a basis to learning democratic habits for contemporary team-based clinical work. William Empson's 'seven types of ambiguity' model for analyzing poetry is transposed to medical education to: (a) formulate seven values proffered by the humanities for improving medical education; (b) offer seven ways of measuring impact of medical humanities provision, thereby reducing ambiguity; and