An Evidence-Based Framework for Medical Student Research Training.

Background: As research becomes an increasingly important component of medical education, there is greater emphasis on incorporating programmatic enhancements to the research experience. This study builds a logic model to summarize research program inputs, outputs, and outcomes from research-oriented medical schools across the country, providing a framework that institutions can use to design and improve their medical student research training programs. Methods: Between November 2021 and February 2022, we administered a survey assessing institutional characteristics, research offerings, curriculum, funding, and student scholarly products to the medical schools ranked 1-50 in research in 2021 by US News and World Report. Results were compiled in the form of a logic model. Results: Thirty-seven institutions (72.5%) responded. Common program inputs included personnel such as at least one funded program director (97.3%), while funding for medical student research activities was highly variable (8-72%). There was much less funding for faculty research mentors (2.7%), advisors (18.9%), and teaching faculty (29.7%). Common outputs included a medical student research office or program (97.3%), formal research curricula (83.8%), and services and programs such as research day (91.9%). The most common outcomes tracked were publications (48.6%), presentations/posters (43.2%), student participation (29.7%), and completion of a research requirement (29.7%). Conclusions: Common themes in medical student research training programs may be conceptualized with a logic model that schools can use to develop, evaluate, and iteratively improve their programs. Institutions should consider their desired program outcomes prior to designing inputs (e.g., funding, personnel) and outputs (e.g., curriculum, training). Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02001-3.

Developing Evidence for Equitable Assessment Characteristics Based on Clinical Learner Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments.

PURPOSE: Medical education is only beginning to explore the factors that contribute to equitable assessment in clinical settings. Increasing knowledge about equitable assessment ensures a quality medical education experience that produces an excellent, diverse physician workforce equipped to address the health care disparities facing patients and communities. Through the lens of the Anti-Deficit Achievement framework, the authors aimed to obtain evidence for a model for equitable assessment in clinical training. METHOD: A discrete choice experiment approach was used which included an instrument with 6 attributes each at 2 levels to reveal learner preferences for the inclusion of each attribute in equitable assessment. Self-identified underrepresented in medicine (UIM) and not underrepresented in medicine (non-UIM) (N = 306) fourth-year medical students and senior residents in medicine, pediatrics, and surgery at 9 institutions across the United States completed the instrument. A mixed-effects logit model was used to determine attributes learners valued most. RESULTS: Participants valued the inclusion of all assessment attributes provided except for peer comparison. The most valued attribute of an equitable assessment was how learner identity, background, and trajectory were appreciated by clinical supervisors. The next most valued attributes were assessment of growth, supervisor bias training, narrative assessments, and assessment of learner's patient care, with participants willing to trade off any of the attributes to get several others. There were no significant differences in value placed on assessment attributes between UIM and non-UIM learners. Residents valued clinical supervisors valuing learner identity, background, and trajectory and clinical supervisor bias training more so than medical students. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers support for the components of an antideficit-focused model for equity in assessment and informs efforts to promote UIM learner success and guide equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives in medical education.

Leveraging Clerkship Experiences to Address Segregated Care: A Survey-Based Approach to Student-Led Advocacy.

Phenomenon: Many academic medical centers (AMCs) have a history of separating patients on the basis of insurance status. In New York State, where Black and Latino patients are more than twice as likely to have Medicaid as white patients, this practice leads to de facto racial segregation in healthcare. Emerging evidence suggests that this segregation of care is detrimental to both patient care and medical education. Medical students are uniquely positioned to be change makers in this space but face significant barriers to speaking out about these disparities and successfully advocating for institutional change. Approach: The authors designed, piloted, and distributed a 16-item survey on segregated care to third-year medical students at a large academic medical center in New York City. Students were asked both open- and close-ended questions about witnessing separation and differences in patient care on the basis of insurance during their clinical rotations. The survey was shared with 140 students in March 2019 with a response rate of 46.4% (n = 65). Preliminary findings were presented to school and hospital administrators. Findings: More than half of survey respondents reported witnessing separation of patient care or differences in patient care on the basis of insurance (56.3%, n = 36 and 51.6%, n = 33 respectively). Many students reported that these experiences contributed to cynicism and burnout. The authors leveraged these results to advocate for quality improvement measures. In Ob-Gyn, department leadership launched a clinical transformation taskforce and recruited a new Vice Chair of Clinical Transformation/Chief Patient Experience Officer, whose role includes addressing segregated care and disparities in health outcomes. The hospital committed to establishing integrated practices in new clinical spaces and launching a similar survey among house staff. Insights: Many medical students experience and participate in segregated care during their clerkships and this has the potential to impact their education. Medical students are well-positioned to recognize segregated care across health systems and leverage their experiences for advocacy. A survey-based approach can be a powerful tool enabling students to collect these experiences to address segregated care and other health equity issues.

Mission Critical: Reimagining Promotion for Clinician-Educators.

Academic clinician-educators who teach health professions trainees and lead educational programs have been penalized by the mismatch between their daily contributions to the academic mission and traditional promotion criteria focused on peer-reviewed publications and external reputation. Despite two decades of incremental approaches, inconsistency and inequity persist in the promotion process for clinician-educators. The authors propose five steps to mark a new approach to academic advancement for clinician-educators: (1) elevate the scholarly approach to teaching over peer-reviewed publications; (2) allow clinician-educators to identify an area of focus; (3) broaden the evidence for educational excellence; (4) prioritize internal referees; and (5) increase clinician-educator representation on promotion committees. Achieving meaningful change requires transforming entrenched traditions and policies at multiple levels. Changes that advance equity are necessary to retain academic faculty members who train the next generation of health professionals.

Exploring the intersection of structural racism and ageism in healthcare.

The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) has consistently advocated for a healthcare system that meets the needs of older adults, including addressing impacts of ageism in healthcare. The intersection of structural racism and ageism compounds the disadvantage experienced by historically marginalized communities. Structural racism and ageism have long been ingrained in all aspects of US society, including healthcare. This intersection exacerbates disparities in social determinants of health, including poor access to healthcare and poor outcomes. These deeply rooted societal injustices have been brought to the forefront of the collective public consciousness at different points throughout history. The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare and exacerbated existing inequities inflicted on historically marginalized communities. Ageist rhetoric and policies during the COVID-19 pandemic further marginalized older adults. Although the detrimental impact of structural racism on health has been well-documented in the literature, generative research on the intersection of structural racism and ageism is limited. The AGS is working to identify and dismantle the healthcare structures that create and perpetuate these combined injustices and, in so doing, create a more just US healthcare system. This paper is intended to provide an overview of important frameworks and guide future efforts to both identify and eliminate bias within healthcare delivery systems and health professions training with a particular focus on the intersection of structural racism and ageism.

An Innovative Approach for Integrating Mandatory, Longitudinal Spirituality Training Into the Medical School Curriculum.

PROBLEM: Most Americans indicate they are religious and/or spiritual and wish to have their beliefs taken into account when engaging with health care providers, yet gaps in medical education and health care practice remain. To underscore the importance of spirituality as a significant social determinant of health, a team at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York developed mandatory spirituality and health training for students integrated into all 4 years of the undergraduate medical education curriculum. APPROACH: From 2014 to 2020, a small group of faculty took an innovative approach, launching the initiative and expanding the team by engaging interprofessional faculty and staff from across the institution. The team used an iterative process to integrate 4 distinct modules into 4 existing courses, spanning the 4 years of medical school. OUTCOMES: The majority of students found that the spirituality and health curriculum was valuable to training and professional development. They appreciated the importance of patients' spiritual needs, valued learning about the role chaplains play in patient care and how to initiate a consult, and indicated they intended to integrate spiritual history taking in their patient care. With respect to process, 3 key factors-establishing an interprofessional team, working through an iterative process, and integrating the curriculum into existing courses-were critical to designing and implementing the modules. NEXT STEPS: The team aims to expand and improve the curriculum by linking learning to specific standardized competencies as well as developing more specific performance assessments to demonstrate achievement of competencies. Professional development efforts will be enhanced so faculty can better model and reinforce the integration of spirituality into health care practices and expand the curriculum on spirituality and health into graduate medical education.

Influences on and Characteristics of the Professional Identity Formation of Clinician Educators: A Qualitative Analysis.

PURPOSE: Professional identity formation is the process of internalizing the ideals, values, and beliefs of a profession. In recent years, research on clinician-educator (CE) identity formation has expanded, yet gaps exist in understanding initial influences on an educator identity, sustainment throughout a career, and development of successful pathways for early CEs. This study explored the initial influences on and characteristics of the professional identity formation of CEs in an age-diverse, multispecialty population in the United States. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional qualitative study of a purposive sample of medical educators at 6 institutions across the United States between 2018 and 2019. Focus groups were conducted to obtain participants' perspectives on their career choice and subsequent formation of their professional identity as CEs. The authors used a thematic analysis of focus group data to identify themes and domains through an iterative process. RESULTS: Twelve focus groups were conducted with a total of 93 participants. Responses were categorized into 5 domains: community supportive of medical education, culture of institution and training, personal characteristics, facilitators, and professionalization of medical education. Themes highlighted the importance of role models and mentors, an affinity and aptitude for teaching and education, specific facilitators for entry into a career in medical education, the evolution from a layperson, importance of formalized training programs, and a supportive academic community. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians experienced a variety of factors that influenced their initial career choice in medical education and subsequent professional identity formation as a CE. This study confirms and expands the current understanding of this process in an age-diverse, multispecialty population of CEs. Educators and administrators designing career development programs across the continuum of medical education should consider these aspects as they mentor and support their learners and faculty.

Guiding principles for undergraduate medical education in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

As the early epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, New York City's medical schools experienced dramatic disruptions in every aspect of medical education. Remote learning was created, seemingly overnight, clerkships were disrupted, licensing examinations were cancelled, teaching faculty were redeployed, student volunteers rallied, and everyone was required to shelter at home. Seismic changes were required to adapt the authors' educational programs to a constantly evolving, unpredictable, and ever-worsening public health crisis. Entirely new communication strategies were adopted and thousands of decisions had to be made, often with little time to carefully reflect on the consequences of those decisions. What allowed each school to navigate these treacherous waters was a set of guiding principles that were used to ground each conversation, and inform every decision. While the language varied somewhat between schools, the core principles were universal and framed a way forward at a time when information, data, precedent, and best practices did not exist. The authors share these guiding principles in the hope that colleagues at other medical schools will find them to be a useful framework as we all continue to cope with the impact of COVID-19 on the future of medical education.

Developing Professionalism and Professional Identity Through Unproctored, Flexible Testing.

The medical education community has devoted a great deal of attention to the development of professionalism in trainees within the context of clinical training-particularly regarding trainees' handling of ethical dilemmas related to clinical care. The community, however, knows comparatively less about the development of professional behavior in medical students during the preclerkship years. In medical schools with flexible testing, students take quizzes or examinations in an unproctored setting at a time of their choosing-as long as it falls within a specified window of time. Unproctored, flexible testing offers students early opportunities to develop appropriate professional behavior. In this Perspective, the authors outline different flexible testing models from three institutions-University of Virginia School of Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai-all of which offer various levels of testing flexibility in relation to time and location. The authors' experiences with these models suggest that preclinical medical students' early development of professional behavior requires scaffolding by faculty and staff. Scaffolding involves setting clear, specific expectations for students (often through the form of an honor code), as well as active engagement and discussion with learners about the expectations and procedures for self-regulation in the academic environment.

Medical students' reflections of a posthospital discharge patient visit.

Transitions of care is an important part of patient safety that is not often taught in medical schools. As part of a curriculum for patient safety and transitions of care, third-year medical students followed patients they cared for during their inpatient rotations on a posthospital discharge visit. Students answered reflection questions on these visits, which were reviewed at a group debriefing session. The written reflections and oral debriefings were analyzed qualitatively to identify what medical students were able to learn from a posthospital discharge visit. Of the students who visited patients, 265 participated in the debriefing sessions, and their responses were grouped into 7 domains and 33 themes. Students commented most often on the importance of family and caregivers who provided support for the patient after hospitalization. They identified problems specific to the discharge process and factors that helped or hindered transitions, noted new experiences visiting postacute care facilities, and also developed solutions to improve transitions. Postdischarge visits combined with brief reflection writing and debriefing allowed students to better understand difficulties that can be faced in care transitions.

Commentary: Racism and Bias in Health Professions Education: How Educators, Faculty Developers, and Researchers Can Make a Difference.

The Research in Medical Education (RIME) Program Planning Committee is committed to advancing scholarship in and promoting dialogue about the critical issues of racism and bias in health professions education (HPE). From the call for studies focused on underrepresented learners and faculty in medicine to the invited 2016 RIME plenary address by Dr. Camara Jones, the committee strongly believes that dismantling racism is critical to the future of HPE.The evidence is glaring: Dramatic racial and ethnic health disparities persist in the United States, people of color remain deeply underrepresented in medical school and academic health systems as faculty, learner experiences across the medical education continuum are fraught with bias, and current approaches to teaching perpetuate stereotypes and insufficiently challenge structural inequities. To achieve racial justice in HPE, academic medicine must commit to leveraging positions of influence and contributing from these positions. In this Commentary, the authors consider three roles (educator, faculty developer, and researcher) represented by the community of scholars and pose potential research questions as well as suggestions for advancing educational research relevant to eliminating racism and bias in HPE.

What are the associations between the quantity of faculty evaluations and residents' perception of quality feedback?

OBJECTIVES: To determine if there is a correlation between the numbers of evaluations submitted by faculty and the perception of the quality of feedback reported by trainees on a yearly survey. METHOD: 147 ACGME-accredited training programs sponsored by a single medical school were included in the analysis. Eighty-seven programs (49 core residency programs and 38 advanced training programs) with 4 or more trainees received ACGME survey summary data for academic year 2013-2014. Resident ratings of satisfaction with feedback were analyzed against the number of evaluations completed per resident during the same period. R-squared correlation analysis was calculated using a Pearson correlation coefficient. RESULTS: 177,096 evaluations were distributed to the 87 programs, of which 117,452 were completed (66%). On average, faculty submitted 33.9 evaluations per resident. Core residency programs had a greater number of evaluations per resident than fellowship programs (39.2 vs. 27.1, respectively, p = 0.15). The average score for the "satisfied with feedback after assignment" survey questions was 4.2 (range 2.2-5.0). There was no overall correlation between the number of evaluations per resident and the residents' perception of feedback from faculty based on medical, surgical or hospital-based programs. CONCLUSIONS: Resident perception of feedback is not correlated with number of faculty evaluations. An emphasis on faculty summative evaluation of resident performance is important but appears to miss the mark as a replacement for on-going, data-driven, structured resident feedback. Understanding the difference between evaluation and feedback is a global concept that is important for all medical educators and learners.

The SGIM TEACH Program: A Curriculum for Teachers of Clinical Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Demand for faculty with teaching expertise is increasing as medical education is becoming well established as a career pathway. Junior faculty may be expected to take on teaching responsibilities with minimal training in teaching skills. AIM: To address the faculty development needs of junior clinician-educators with teaching responsibilities and those changing their career focus to include teaching. SETTING: Sessions at two Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) annual meetings combined with local coaching and online learning during the intervening year. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-nine faculty scholars in four consecutive annual cohorts from 2013 to 2016. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Scholars participate in a full-day core teaching course as well as selective workshops at the annual meetings. Between meetings they receive direct observation and feedback on their teaching from a local coach and participate in an online discussion group. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Sessions were evaluated using a post-session survey. Overall content rating was 4.48 (out of 5). Eighty-nine percent of participants completed all requirements. Of these, 100% agreed that they had gained valuable knowledge and skills. DISCUSSION: The TEACH certificate program provides inexperienced faculty teachers an opportunity to develop core skills. Satisfaction is high. Future research should focus on the impact that this and similar programs have on teaching skills.