How persuasive is AI-generated propaganda?

Can large language models, a form of artificial intelligence (AI), generate persuasive propaganda? We conducted a preregistered survey experiment of US respondents to investigate the persuasiveness of news articles written by foreign propagandists compared to content generated by GPT-3 davinci (a large language model). We found that GPT-3 can create highly persuasive text as measured by participants' agreement with propaganda theses. We further investigated whether a person fluent in English could improve propaganda persuasiveness. Editing the prompt fed to GPT-3 and/or curating GPT-3's output made GPT-3 even more persuasive, and, under certain conditions, as persuasive as the original propaganda. Our findings suggest that propagandists could use AI to create convincing content with limited effort.

Contributions of US Medical Schools to Primary Care (2003-2014): Determining and Predicting Who Really Goes Into Primary Care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Schools of medicine in the United States may overstate the placement of their graduates in primary care. The purpose of this project was to determine the magnitude by which primary care output is overestimated by commonly used metrics and identify a more accurate method for predicting actual primary care output. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort study with a convenience sample of graduates from US medical schools granting the MD degree. We determined the actual practicing specialty of those graduates considered primary care based on the Residency Match Method by using a variety of online sources. Analyses compared the percentage of graduates actually practicing primary care between the Residency Match Method and the Intent to Practice Primary Care Method. RESULTS: The final study population included 17,509 graduates from 20 campuses across 14 university systems widely distributed across the United States and widely varying in published ranking for producing primary care graduates. The commonly used Residency Match Method predicted a 41.2% primary care output rate. The actual primary care output rate was 22.3%. The proposed new method, the Intent to Practice Primary Care Method, predicted a 17.1% primary care output rate, which was closer to the actual primary care rate. CONCLUSIONS: A valid, reliable method of predicting primary care output is essential for workforce training and planning. Medical schools, administrators, policy makers, and popular press should adopt this new, more reliable primary care reporting method.

Clinical Characteristics and Glycemic Outcomes of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Requiring Maximum Dose Insulin Glargine/Lixisenatide Fixed-Ratio Combination or Insulin Glargine in the LixiLan-L Trial.

INTRODUCTION: iGlarLixi is a titratable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar, 100 units/ml) and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. This post hoc analysis of the phase 3 LixiLan-L trial (NCT02058160) investigated baseline characteristics, glycemic control, and safety outcomes in participants who received the study-specified maximum dose (60 units/day) of iGlarLixi or iGlar vs. those who received < 60 units/day. METHODS: Outcomes were compared for participants receiving 60 or < 60 units/day at week 30. Endpoints analyzed included change in A1C, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h postprandial glucose (2-h PPG), body weight, proportion of participants achieving A1C < 7.0%, proportion of participants receiving rescue therapy, documented symptomatic hypoglycemia, and gastrointestinal adverse event (GI AE) incidence. RESULTS: By week 30, 27% (iGlarLixi) and 31% (iGlar) of participants received the maximum dose. Participants on 60 vs. < 60 units/day were younger and had higher body weight, body mass index (BMI), FPG, and baseline insulin dose. In both dose groups, A1C change from baseline was significantly greater with iGlarLixi vs. iGlar, and more participants treated with iGlarLixi vs. iGlar achieved A1C < 7.0%. No significant differences were observed in change from baseline for A1C, FPG, 2-h PPG, or GI AE incidence between insulin dose groups, regardless of treatment. In both treatment arms, incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was lower in participants receiving 60 units/day vs. those receiving < 60 units/day. Participants treated with iGlarLixi (< 60 or 60 units/day) had modest weight loss over 30 weeks vs. an increase in weight compared with iGlar. CONCLUSIONS: Maximum doses of iGlarLixi were required in participants with a more insulin-resistant clinical phenotype (younger, higher BMI, FPG, and insulin doses). Benefits were observed with iGlarLixi vs. iGlar, even at 60 units/day, with more participants achieving glycemic goals, no increase in symptomatic hypoglycemia, and a modest reduction in body weight. FUNDING: Sanofi US, Inc.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF IGLARLIXI IN HISPANICS AND NON-HISPANIC WHITES WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES.

Objective: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is more common in Hispanic than non-Hispanic white (NHW) populations worldwide, and ethnicity, among other factors, may affect response to therapy. The efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar) and the fixed-ratio combination of iGlar and the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) was assessed in Hispanic and NHW patients with T2D from 25 countries. Methods: In this post hoc analysis, data from two 30-week randomized controlled trials comparing iGlar and iGlarLixi in patients with T2D uncontrolled on basal insulin ± oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs; LixiLan-L: NCT02058160) or uncontrolled on metformin ± OADs (LixiLan-O: NCT02058147) were evaluated. Results: Of the 1,512 patients included across trials, 301 were Hispanic and 1,211 NHW. Compared with iGlar, iGlarLixi resulted in greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and 2-hour postprandial glucose and a higher proportion of patients at target A1C <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol), regardless of ethnicity. Among NHWs from the LixiLan-L trial, documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤70 mg/dL) rates were higher with iGlar compared with iGlarLixi (P = .06), whereas this trend was reversed among Hispanics (P = .07). Nevertheless, in both trials, a greater proportion of patients taking iGlarLixi than iGlar reached the composite efficacy endpoints of target A1C without hypoglycemia and target A1C without weight gain, regardless of ethnicity. Conclusion: These results indicate that iGlarLixi is a viable therapeutic option for both Hispanic and NHW patients with T2D, as it is efficacious without a significant increase in hypoglycemia, irrespective of ethnicity. Abbreviations: A1C = glycated hemoglobin; BMI = body mass index; FPG = fasting plasma glucose; FRC = fixed-ratio combination; GLP-1 RA = glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; HDL-C = high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; iGlar = insulin glargine; iGlarLixi = insulin glargine + lixisenatide; LDL-C = low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; NHW = non-Hispanic white; OAD = oral antidiabetes drug; PPG = postprandial glucose; T2D = type 2 diabetes.

When basal insulin is not enough: A dose-response relationship between insulin glargine 100 units/mL and glycaemic control.

AIMS: A post-hoc analysis to assess the impact in people with type 2 diabetes, of increasing doses of basal insulin on glycaemic measures, body weight and hypoglycaemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included data from prospective, randomized controlled treat-to-target trials of ≥24 weeks' duration in people with type 2 diabetes, uncontrolled on metformin and sulphonylureas, and treated with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (U100), who had at least six fasting plasma glucose (FPG) measurements. The impact of insulin dose on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) values, FPG, hypoglycaemia incidence (<3.9 mmol/L [70 mg/dL]), and body weight was analysed. A total of 458 participants from three eligible trials were included. RESULTS: The observed relationship between higher basal insulin doses and glycaemic control was non-linear, with increasing insulin dose leading to smaller reductions in FPG and HbA1c for doses >0.3 IU/kg/d, with a plateauing effect at 0.5 IU/kg/d. Total daily dose of insulin >0.5 IU/kg/d resulted in greater weight gain, but without higher rates of hypoglycaemia, compared with insulin doses ≤0.5 IU/kg/d. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that basal insulin doses >0.5 IU/kg/d have diminishing additional impact on improving glycaemic measures, with the disadvantage of additional weight gain. Clinicians should consider anti-hyperglycaemic treatment intensification at doses approaching 0.5 IU/kg/d.

Correction to: Bedtime-to-Morning Glucose Difference and iGlarLixi in Type 2 Diabetes: Post Hoc Analysis of LixiLan-L.

In the original publication, the text in abstract section under the 'Results' section is incorrectly published as 'higher proportion of patients reached a BeAM value < 55 mg/dL.

Bedtime-to-Morning Glucose Difference and iGlarLixi in Type 2 Diabetes: Post Hoc Analysis of LixiLan-L.

INTRODUCTION: A difference of ≥ 50-55 mg/dL between bedtime and morning glucose (BeAM) values in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin is an indicator of poor postprandial glucose control. This analysis compared the effect of treatment with a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) vs insulin glargine (iGlar) on BeAM values, and evaluated the impact of BeAM values on glycemic and safety endpoints. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of 517 participants from the LixiLan-L trial, change in BeAM values and composite efficacy and safety endpoints stratified by BeAM value < 55 mg/dL or ≥ 55 mg/dL were evaluated in patients with T2D uncontrolled on basal insulin randomized to iGlarLixi or iGlar over 30 weeks (LixiLan-L). RESULTS: Greater reductions in BeAM values were seen with iGlarLixi vs iGlar, and a higher proportion of patients reached a BeAM value < 55 mg/dL in the iGlarLixi arm. A BeAM value < 55 mg/dL was associated with improved glycemic control, lower risk of hypoglycemia, and a greater proportion of patients achieving glycemic targets without hypoglycemia or weight gain. Greater reductions in BeAM values were seen with iGlarLixi vs iGlar, irrespective of stratification by glycated hemoglobin A1c or glycemic endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Greater reductions in bedtime-to-morning glucose differential, or BeAM, were observed with iGlarLixi vs iGlar in patients with T2D uncontrolled on basal insulin, reflecting better overall control of both fasting and prandial glucose and more appropriate matching of therapy to physiologic needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02058160. FUNDING: Sanofi US, Inc.

Low incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events over time with a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide versus lixisenatide alone.

This post hoc analysis of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) from the phase 3 LixiLan-L (NCT02058160) and LixiLan-O (NCT02058147) trials aimed to determine the frequency and timing of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea for iGlarLixi, a titratable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide, versus iGlar alone or iGlar and lixisenatide alone, in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) or basal insulin ± OADs. In iGlarLixi-treated patients, the rate of GI AEs during the initial weeks of treatment was lower versus patients treated with lixisenatide alone (9.6% and 11.7% of iGlarLixi-treated patients in LixiLan-L and LixiLan-O, respectively, vs. 27.5% of lixisenatide-treated patients in LixiLan-O). Beyond day 60, these rates were generally low and similar to those of lixisenatide. These lower rates are likely due to the gradual titration of lixisenatide in iGlarLixi. Median durations of intermittent GI AEs in the iGlarLixi arms were 6.0, 2.0 and 2.5 days (LixiLan-L), and 5.0, 1.0 and 3.5 days (LixiLan-O), respectively. iGlarLixi-associated GI AEs were transient, mostly mild or moderate in severity, and occurred mainly during initial titration.

Improved glycaemic control and lower hypoglycaemia risk with reduced prior oral antidiabetes drug therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin glargine 300 U/mL.

AIMS: Data from the EDITION 3 randomized study and the Clinformatics claims database were analysed to determine whether insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) could provide insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) with reductions in prior OAD therapy without compromising glycaemic control, and while preserving its known low incidence of hypoglycaemia compared with insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). METHODS: Patient-level data from EDITION 3 and de-identified data from the Clinformatics real-world claims database were analysed. RESULTS: At baseline, 70% of patients in EDITION 3 were on a background of ≥2 OADs. Among the 435 and 437 patients who initiated basal insulin with Gla-300 and Gla-100, respectively, at Month 6, 336 (77%) and 338 (77%) were using ≤1 OAD. Adding Gla-300 or Gla-100 similarly allowed for a reduction in background OAD medication in the Clinformatics dataset (N = 6430), such that, at 6 months postbasal insulin initiation, 14% of patients were no longer taking any OADs. In the analysis of the EDITION 3 study, reduction in OAD burden did not compromise glycaemic benefit, and the low incidence of hypoglycaemia associated with Gla-300 compared with Gla-100 was also preserved. Documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia (blood glucose ≤70 mg/dL) occurred in 30.5% vs 41.0% of patients treated with Gla-300 and Gla-100, respectively (P = 0.0442). CONCLUSION: Patients with T2D who initiate basal insulin with Gla-300 could potentially reduce their prior OAD use without compromising glycaemic control and with less hypoglycaemia than with Gla-100.

INSULIN GLARGINE 300 U/ML IS ASSOCIATED WITH LESS WEIGHT GAIN WHILE MAINTAINING GLYCEMIC CONTROL AND LOW RISK OF HYPOGLYCEMIA COMPARED WITH INSULIN GLARGINE 100 U/ML IN AN AGING POPULATION WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES.

OBJECTIVE: Assess efficacy, hypoglycemia, and weight gain in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) or 100 U/mL (Gla-100) across different age groups. METHODS: Pooled data were generated for patients randomized to Gla-300 or Gla-100 in the EDITION 2 (NCT01499095) and 3 (NCT01676220) studies. In 4 age groups (<55, ≥55 to <60, ≥60 to <65, ≥65 years), glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C), percentage of patients reaching A1C <7.5% (58 mmol/mol), weight change, confirmed hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤70 mg/dL), and/or severe hypoglycemia (events requiring third-party assistance) were analyzed with descriptive statistics and logistic, binomial, and analysis of covariance regression modeling. RESULTS: A1C reductions from baseline and proportions of patients at target were similar for Gla-300 and Gla-100 across all age groups at 6 and 12 months, but hypoglycemia incidence and event rate were lower with Gla-300 at 6 (both P<.001) and 12 months ( P<.001 and P = .005, respectively). Patients on Gla-300 gained less weight than those on Gla-100 at 6 ( P = .027) and 12 months ( P = .021). Changes in weight and daily weight-adjusted insulin dose decreased with increasing age at 6 ( P<.001 and P = .017, respectively) and 12 months ( P<.001 and P = .011, respectively). CONCLUSION: Older patients with T2D may benefit from treatment with Gla-300, which is associated with a lower hypoglycemia rate and less weight gain with similar efficacy compared with Gla-100. ABBREVIATIONS: A1C = glycated hemoglobin A1C BMI = body mass index Gla-100 = insulin glargine 100 U/mL Gla-300 = insulin glargine 300 U/mL OAD = oral antidiabetes drug T2D = type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL Versus Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL in High-Risk and Low-Risk Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Stratified Using Common Clinical Performance Measures.

BACKGROUND: To determine whether previously reported reductions in hypoglycemia associated with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) compared with insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) are impacted by patient risk category in type 2 diabetes (T2D), clinical performance measures based on the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) were applied to patient-level data from the EDITION 2 and EDITION 3 clinical trials that compared Gla-300 and Gla-100. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, patients were stratified as low risk (LR) if patients were <65 years old with no comorbidities derived from HEDIS (HbA1c target <7.0% [53 mmol/mol]), or as high risk (HR) if patients were either ≥65 years old or had one or more HEDIS-defined comorbidities (HbA1c target <8.0% [64 mmol/mol]). Primary endpoint was a composite of patients achieving HbA1c target without confirmed or severe hypoglycemia over 6 months in the different treatment groups in each of the EDITION trials. RESULTS: There was a statistically nonsignificant trend of more patients treated with Gla-300 achieving the composite endpoint compared with Gla-100 in both the LR and HR patient cohorts, regardless of prior insulin experience. A similar trend was observed for the composite endpoint of HbA1c target without nocturnal hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: There is a consistent, nonsignificant trend suggesting that Gla-300 might reduce the burden of hypoglycemia compared with Gla-100 in patients with T2D irrespective of whether they are classed as LR or HR based on age- and National Committee for Quality Assurance Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set-derived comorbidities.

Changes in medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions from 2003 to 2012: a multi-institutional follow-up survey.

PURPOSE: To ascertain whether changes occurred in medical student exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions from 2003-2012, which factors influence exposure and attitudes, and whether exposure and attitudes influence future plans to interact with drug companies. METHOD: In 2012, the authors surveyed 1,269 third-year students at eight U.S. medical schools. Items explored student exposure to, attitudes toward, and future plans regarding drug company interactions. The authors compared 2012 survey data with their 2003 survey data from third-year students at the same schools. RESULTS: The 2012 response rate was 68.2% (866/1,269). Compared with 2003, in 2012, students were significantly less frequently exposed to interactions (1.6/month versus 4.1/month, P < .001), less likely to feel entitled to gifts (41.8% versus 80.3%, P < .001), and more apt to feel gifts could influence them (44.3% versus 31.2%, P < .001). In 2012, 545/839 students (65.0%) reported private outpatient offices were the main location of exposure to pharmaceutical representatives, despite spending only 18.4% of their clerkship-rotation time there. In 2012, 310/703 students (44.1%) were unaware their schools had rules restricting interactions, and 467/837 (55.8%) planned to interact with pharmaceutical representatives during residency. CONCLUSIONS: Students in 2012 had less exposure to drug company interactions and were more likely to have skeptical attitudes than students in 2003. These changes are consistent with national organizations' recommendations to limit and teach about these interactions. Continued efforts to study and influence students' and physician role models' exposures to and attitudes about drug companies are warranted.

Alliance for clinical education perspective paper: recommendations for redesigning the "final year" of medical school.

BACKGROUND: Although medical school typically lasts 4 years, little attention has been devoted to the structure of the educational experience that takes place during the final year of medical school. SUMMARY: In this perspectives paper, we outline goals for the 4th year of medical school to facilitate a transition from undergraduate to graduate medical education. We provide recommendations for capstone courses, subinternship rotations, and specialty-specific schedules, and we conclude with recommendations to medical students and medical schools for how to use the recommendations contained in this document. CONCLUSIONS: We provide an overview of general competencies and specialty specific recommendations to serve as a foundation for medical schools to develop robust 4th-year curricula and for medical students to plan their 4th-year schedules.

Contemporary teaching strategies of exemplary community preceptors--is technology helping?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many schools rely upon community preceptors for office-based education of medical students. These preceptors struggle to balance clinical care with the learning needs of students. We aim to gain a deeper understanding of the teaching rewards and challenges of current community preceptors. METHODS: Five schools' family medicine clerkship directors conducted in-depth interviews of two exemplary preceptors at each of their programs. Following qualitative analysis of the interviews, three directors conducted one focus group at their school. The individual and group interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using grounded theory. RESULTS: Exemplary community preceptors described strategies to improve the learning environment and specific teaching approaches. Well-known teaching strategies such as role modeling, adjusting instruction to the learner's needs, and selecting patients appropriate for a specific student were used. They also described newer techniques such as co-learning and integrating technology, for example, accessing online, current practice guidelines together with the student. They detailed challenges to teaching, including time constraints and too much content to cover and provided advice about teaching tools. CONCLUSIONS: While challenged by clinical demands, preceptors enjoyed teaching and found it rewarding. They used time-proven teaching strategies as well as technology and online resources to facilitate ambulatory teaching. Community preceptors continue to struggle to integrate learners and the priorities of the medical school curriculum into the clinical environment. Further development of electronic tools and other resources to support the teaching needs of preceptors may contribute to learning and help minimize preceptor burden.

Relationships between drug company representatives and medical students: medical school policies and attitudes of student affairs deans and third-year medical students.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to ascertain the details of medical school policies about relationships between drug companies and medical students as well as student affairs deans' attitudes about these interactions. METHODS: In 2005, the authors surveyed deans and student affairs deans at all U.S. medical schools and asked whether their schools had a policy about relationships between drug companies and medical students. They asked deans at schools with policies to summarize them, queried student affairs deans regarding their attitudes about gifts, and compared their attitudes with those of students who were studied previously. RESULTS: Independently of each other, 114 out of 126 deans (90.5%) and 114 out of 126 student affairs deans (90.5%) responded (identical numbers are not misprints). Ten schools had a policy regarding relationships between medical students and drug company representatives. Student affairs deans were much more likely than students to perceive that gifts were inappropriate. CONCLUSION: These 2005 policies show trends meriting review by current medical schools in considering how to comply with the 2008 Association of American Medical Colleges recommendations about relationships between drug companies and medical students or physicians.

Medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions: a national survey.

CONTEXT: While exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions among residents have been studied extensively, relatively little is known about relationships between drug companies and medical students. OBJECTIVE: To measure third-year medical students' exposure to and attitudes about drug company interactions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In 2003, we distributed a 64-item anonymous survey to 1143 third-year students at 8 US medical schools, exploring their exposure and response to drug company interactions. The schools' characteristics included a wide spectrum of ownership types, National Institutes of Health funding, and geographic locations. In 2005, we conducted a national survey of student affairs deans to measure the prevalence of school-wide policies on drug company-medical student interactions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Monthly frequency of students' exposure to various activities and gifts during clerkships, and attitudes about receiving gifts. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 826/1143 (72.3%), with range among schools of 30.9%-90.7%. Mean exposure for each student was 1 gift or sponsored activity per week. Of respondents, 762/818 (93.2%) were asked or required by a physician to attend at least 1 sponsored lunch. Regarding attitudes, 556/808 (68.8%) believed gifts would not influence their practices and 464/804 (57.7%) believed gifts would not affect colleagues' practices. Of the students, 553/604 (80.3%) believed that they were entitled to gifts. Of 183 students who thought a gift valued at less than $50 was inappropriate, 158 (86.3%) had accepted one. The number of students who simultaneously believed that sponsored grand rounds are educationally helpful and are likely to be biased was 452/758 (59.6%). Students at 1 school who had attended a seminar about drug company-physician relationships were no more likely than the nonattending classmates to show skepticism. Of the respondents, 704/822 (85.6%) did not know if their school had a policy on these relationships. In a national survey of student affairs deans, among the 99 who knew their policy status, only 10 (10.1%) reported having school-wide policies about these interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Student experiences and attitudes suggest that as a group they are at risk for unrecognized influence by marketing efforts. Research should focus on evaluating methods to limit these experiences and affect the development of students' attitudes to ensure that physicians' decisions are based solely on helping each patient achieve the greatest possible benefit.

Peer coaching as a technique to foster professional development in clinical ambulatory settings.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have examined how peer coaching is an effective educational and development technique in contexts outside the classroom. This research focused on peer coaching as a platform to study the process of professional development for physicians. The purpose was to identify perceived benefits coaches received from a coaching encounter and how this relates to their own process of professional development. METHODS: Critical incident interviews with 13 physician coaches were conducted and tape recorded. Themes were identified using a thematic analysis technique. RESULTS: Themes emerged clustering around two distinct benefit orientations. Group 1, reflection and teaching coaches, tended to focus on others and discuss how positively they experienced the encounter. Group 2, personal learning and change coaches, expressed benefits along more personal lines. DISCUSSION: Peer coaching contributes to physicians' professional development by encouraging reflection time and learning. Peer coaching affords positive impact to those who coach in addition to those who receive the coaching. The two clusters of benefits support the performance, learning, and development theory in that there are multiple modes to describe adult growth and development. Programs of this type should be considered in medical faculty development activities associated with medical education.