The fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 156.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medical education has the potential to facilitate complicated tasks and improve efficiency. For example, AI could help automate assessment of written responses, or provide feedback on medical image interpretations with excellent reliability. While applications of AI in learning, instruction, and assessment are growing, further exploration is still required. There exist few conceptual or methodological guides for medical educators wishing to evaluate or engage in AI research. In this guide, we aim to: 1) describe practical considerations involved in reading and conducting studies in medical education using AI, 2) define basic terminology and 3) identify which medical education problems and data are ideally-suited for using AI.

Medical student experiences with accessing and entering patient information in electronic health records during the obstetrics-gynecology clerkship.

BACKGROUND: Medical school graduates should be able to enter information from patient encounters and to write orders and prescriptions in the electronic health record. Studies have shown that, although students often can access electronic health records, some students may receive inadequate preparation for these skills. Greater understanding of student exposure to electronic health records during their obstetrics and gynecology clerkships can help to determine the extent to which students receive the educational experiences that may best prepare them for their future training and practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine medical student reporting of electronic health record use during the obstetrics and gynecology clerkship. STUDY DESIGN: A Step 2 Clinical Knowledge End-of-Examination Survey about electronic health record use was administered to medical students after they completed the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge component of the United States Medical Licensing Examination. For inpatient and outpatient rotations, students were asked if they accessed a record and if they entered notes or orders into it. Descriptive statistics for a sample of 16,366 medical students who graduated from Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited schools from 2012-2016 summarize student interactions with electronic health records by rotation type and graduation year. Chi-square techniques were used to examine mean differences in access and entry. RESULTS: The survey had an overall response rate of 70%. In 2016, most survey respondents (94%) accessed electronic health records during their obstetrics and gynecology clerkship, but 26% of them reported "read-only" access. On the inpatient service, <10% of students reported any order entry; 58% of them reported entering progress notes, and 47% of them reported entering an admitting history and physical. CONCLUSION: Medical school graduates who are entering obstetrics and gynecology residencies are expected to be competent in documenting clinical encounters and entering orders, including those that are unique to obstetrics and gynecology. This study shows that some students may receive less experience with entering information into electronic health records during their obstetrics and gynecology clerkships than others, which could result in unequal levels of preparedness for graduate medical education.

The role of data science and machine learning in Health Professions Education: practical applications, theoretical contributions, and epistemic beliefs.

Data science is an inter-disciplinary field that uses computer-based algorithms and methods to gain insights from large and often complex datasets. Data science, which includes Artificial Intelligence techniques such as Machine Learning (ML), has been credited with the promise to transform Health Professions Education (HPE) by offering approaches to handle big (and often messy) data. To examine this promise, we conducted a critical review to explore: (1) published applications of data science and ML in HPE literature and (2) the potential role of data science and ML in shifting theoretical and epistemological perspectives in HPE research and practice. Existing data science studies in HPE are often not informed by theory, but rather oriented towards developing applications for specific problems, uses, and contexts. The most common areas currently being studied are procedural (e.g., computer-based tutoring or adaptive systems and assessment of technical skills). We found that epistemic beliefs informing the use of data science and ML in HPE poses a challenge for existing views on what constitutes objective knowledge and the role of human subjectivity for instruction and assessment. As a result, criticisms have emerged that the integration of data science in the field of HPE is in danger of becoming technically driven and narrowly focused in its approach to teaching, learning and assessment. Our findings suggest that researchers tend to formalize around the epistemological stance driven largely by traditions of a research paradigm. Future data science studies in HPE need to involve both education scientists and data scientists to ensure mutual advancements in the development of educational theory and practical applications. This may be one of the most important tasks in the integration of data science and ML in HPE research in the years to come.

Electronic Health Record Use in Internal Medicine Clerkships and Sub-internships for Medical Students Graduating from 2012 to 2016.

BACKGROUND: As electronic health records (EHRs) became broadly available in medical practice, effective use of EHRs by medical students emerged as an essential aspect of medical education. While new federal clinical documentation guidelines have the potential to encourage greater medical student EHR use and enhance student learning experiences with respect to EHRs, little is known nationally about how students have engaged with EHRs in the past. OBJECTIVE: This study examines medical student accounts of EHR use during their internal medicine (IM) clerkships and sub-internships during a 5-year time period prior to the new clinical documentation guidelines. DESIGN: An online survey about EHR use was administered to medical students immediately after they completed USMLE Step 2 CK. PARTICIPANTS: The sample included 16,602 medical students planning to graduate from US medical schools from 2012 to 2016. MAIN MEASURES: Descriptive statistics were computed to determine the average percentage of students engaged in various health record activities during their IM educational experiences by graduation year. KEY RESULTS: The vast majority (99%) of medical students used EHRs during IM clerkships or sub-internships. Most students reported that they entered information into EHRs during the inpatient component of the IM clerkship (84%), outpatient component of the IM clerkship (70%), and the IM sub-internship (92%). Yet, 43% of the students who graduated in 2016 never entered admission orders and 35% of them never entered post-admission orders. CONCLUSIONS: Medical school graduates ought to be able to effectively document clinical encounters and enter orders into EHR systems. Although most students used and entered information into EHRs during their IM clinical training, many students appear to have received inadequate opportunities to enter notes or orders, in particular. Implications for graduate medical education preparedness are considered. Future research should address similar questions using comparable national data collected after the recent guideline changes.

US Medical Student Performance on the NBME Subject Examination in Internal Medicine: Do Clerkship Sequence and Clerkship Length Matter?

BACKGROUND: Prior to graduation, US medical students are required to complete clinical clerkship rotations, most commonly in the specialty areas of family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology (ob/gyn), pediatrics, psychiatry, and surgery. Within a school, the sequence in which students complete these clerkships varies. In addition, the length of these rotations varies, both within a school for different clerkships and between schools for the same clerkship. OBJECTIVE: The present study investigated the effects of clerkship sequence and length on performance on the National Board of Medical Examiner's subject examination in internal medicine. PARTICIPANTS: The study sample included 16,091 students from 67 US Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME)-accredited medical schools who graduated in 2012 or 2013. MAIN MEASURES: Student-level measures included first-attempt internal medicine subject examination scores, first-attempt USMLE Step 1 scores, and five dichotomous variables capturing whether or not students completed rotations in family medicine, ob/gyn, pediatrics, psychiatry, and surgery prior to taking the internal medicine rotation. School-level measures included clerkship length and average Step 1 score. DESIGN: Multilevel models with students nested in schools were estimated with internal medicine subject examination scores as the dependent measure. Step 1 scores and the five dichotomous variables were treated as student-level predictors. Internal medicine clerkship length and average Step 1 score were used to predict school-to-school variation in average internal medicine subject examination scores. KEY RESULTS: Completion of rotations in surgery, pediatrics and family medicine prior to taking the internal medicine examination significantly improved scores, with the largest benefit observed for surgery (coefficient = 1.58 points; p value < 0.01); completion of rotations in ob/gyn and psychiatry were unrelated to internal medicine subject examination performance. At the school level, longer internal medicine clerkships were associated with higher scores on the internal medicine examination (coefficient = 0.23 points/week; p value < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The order in which students complete clinical clerkships and the length of the internal medicine clerkship are associated with their internal medicine subject examination scores. Findings may have implications for curriculum re-design.

Gender differences in examinee performance on the Step 2 Clinical Skills data gathering (DG) and patient note (PN) components.

Multiple studies examining the relationship between physician gender and performance on examinations have found consistent significant gender differences, but relatively little information is available related to any gender effect on interviewing and written communication skills. The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) examination is a multi-station examination where examinees (physicians in training) interact with, and are rated by, standardized patients (SPs) portraying cases in an ambulatory setting. Data from a recent complete year (2009) were analyzed via a series of hierarchical linear models to examine the impact of examinee gender on performance on the data gathering (DG) and patient note (PN) components of this examination. Results from both components show that not only do women have higher scores on average, but women continue to perform significantly better than men when other examinee and case variables are taken into account. Generally, the effect sizes are moderate, reflecting an approximately 2% score advantage by encounter. The advantage for female examinees increased for encounters that did not require a physical examination (for the DG component only) and for encounters that involved a Women's Health issue (for both components). The gender of the SP did not have an impact on the examinee gender effect for DG, indicating a desirable lack of interaction between examinee and SP gender. The implications of the findings, especially with respect to the validity of the use of the examination outcomes, are discussed.

An Examination of the Associations Among USMLE Step 3 Scores and the Likelihood of Disciplinary Action in Practice.

PURPOSE: As the last examination in the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) sequence, Step 3 provides a safeguard before physicians enter into unsupervised practice. There is, however, little validity research focusing on Step 3 scores beyond examining its associations with other educational and professional assessments thought to cover similar content. This study examines the associations between Step 3 scores and subsequent receipt of disciplinary action taken by state medical boards for problematic behavior in practice. It analyzes Step 3 total, Step 3 computer-based case simulation (CCS), and Step 3 multiple-choice question (MCQ) scores. METHOD: The final sample included 275,392 board-certified physicians who graduated from MD-granting medical schools and who passed Step 3 between 2000 and 2017. Cross-classified multilevel logistic regression models were used to examine the effects of Step 3 scores on the likelihood of receiving a disciplinary action, controlling for other USMLE scores and accounting for jurisdiction and specialty. RESULTS: Results showed that physicians with higher Step 3 total, CCS, and MCQ scores tended to have lower chances of receiving a disciplinary action, after accounting for other USMLE scores. Specifically, a 1-standard-deviation increase in Step 3 total, CCS, and MCQ score was associated with a 23%, 11%, and 17% decrease in the odds of receiving a disciplinary action, respectively. The effect of Step 2 CK score on the likelihood of receiving a disciplinary action was statistically significant, while the effect of Step 1 score became statistically nonsignificant when other Step scores were included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians who perform better on Step 3 are less likely to receive a disciplinary action from a state medical board for problematic behavior in practice. These findings provide some validity evidence for the use of Step 3 scores when making medical licensure decisions in the United States.

Medical Student Experiences With Electronic Health Records Nationally: A Longitudinal Analysis Including School-Level Effects.

PURPOSE: Increasingly, medical school graduates have been expected to be competent in the knowledge and skills associated with effective electronic health record (EHR) use. Yet little is known about how student experiences with EHRs have changed over time or how these trends vary by medical school. This study examined shifts in U.S. medical student interactions with EHRs during their clinical education, 2012-2016, and how these interactions varied by clerkship within and across medical schools. METHOD: Data came from an online survey about EHR use administered to medical students after completing the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge portion of the United States Medical Licensing Examination. For a sample of 17,202 medical students from 140 U.S.-based Liaison Committee on Medical Education accredited medical school campuses, multilevel modeling techniques were used to estimate overall and school-specific trends in student access to and entry of information into EHRs for 7 core inpatient clerkships. RESULTS: Results showed upward trajectories in likelihood of student EHR experiences, with smaller increases found for information entry compared with access. These trends varied by inpatient clerkship rotation, with some disciplines exhibiting more rapid increases than others. For both access and information entry, estimated clerkship-specific trajectories differed by medical school in terms of size and direction. For all clerkships, greater school-to-school variation in the likelihood of student entry, compared with student access, remained at the end of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in medical student interactions with EHRs suggest a growing commitment to educating students on safe and effective EHR use. Nonetheless, at some schools and in some clerkships, students may receive inadequate educational opportunities to practice using EHRs. In turn, medical students may be differentially prepared to effectively engage with EHRs upon entering residency, particularly with the knowledge and skills needed to effectively document and transmit information in EHRs.

Multiple United States Medical Licensing Examination Attempts and the Estimated Risk of Disciplinary Actions Among Graduates of U.S. and Canadian Medical Schools.

PURPOSE: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) recently announced 2 policy changes: shifting from numeric score reporting on the Step 1 examination to pass/fail reporting and limiting examinees to 4 attempts for each Step component. In light of these policies, exam measures other than scores, such as the number of examination attempts, are of interest. Attempt limit policies are intended to ensure minimum standards of physician competency, yet little research has explored how Step attempts relate to physician practice outcomes. This study examined the relationship between USMLE attempts and the likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions from state medical boards. METHOD: The sample population was 219,018 graduates from U.S. and Canadian MD-granting medical schools who passed all USMLE Step examinations by 2011 and obtained a medical license in the United States, using data from the NBME and the Federation of State Medical Boards. Logistic regressions estimated how attempts on Steps 1, 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK), and 3 examinations influenced the likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions by 2018, while accounting for physician characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 3,399 physicians (2%) received at least 1 disciplinary action. Additional attempts needed to pass Steps 1, 2 CK, and 3 were associated with an increased likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions (odds ratio [OR]: 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01, 1.13; OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.16; OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.17, respectively), after accounting for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians who took multiple attempts to pass Steps 1, 2 CK, and 3 were associated with higher estimated likelihood of receiving disciplinary actions. This study offers support for licensure and practice standards to account for physicians' USMLE attempts. The relatively small effect sizes, however, caution policy makers from placing sole emphasis on this relationship.

Exploring the Association Between USMLE Scores and ACGME Milestone Ratings: A Validity Study Using National Data From Emergency Medicine.

PURPOSE: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) sequence and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones represent 2 major components along the continuum of assessment from undergraduate through graduate medical education. This study examines associations between USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores and ACGME emergency medicine (EM) milestone ratings. METHOD: In February 2019, subject matter experts (SMEs) provided judgments of expected associations for each combination of Step examination and EM subcompetency. The resulting sets of subcompetencies with expected strong and weak associations were selected for convergent and discriminant validity analysis, respectively. National-level data for 2013-2018 were provided; the final sample included 6,618 EM residents from 158 training programs. Empirical bivariate correlations between milestone ratings and Step scores were calculated, then those correlations were compared with the SMEs' judgments. Multilevel regression analyses were conducted on the selected subcompetencies, in which milestone ratings were the dependent variable, and Step 1 score, Step 2 CK score, and cohort year were independent variables. RESULTS: Regression results showed small but statistically significant positive relationships between Step 2 CK score and the subcompetencies (regression coefficients ranged from 0.02 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.01-0.03] to 0.12 [95% CI, 0.11-0.13]; all P < .05), with the degree of association matching the SMEs' judgments for 7 of the 9 selected subcompetencies. For example, a 1 standard deviation increase in Step 2 CK score predicted a 0.12 increase in MK-01 milestone rating, when controlling for Step 1. Step 1 score showed a small statistically significant effect with only the MK-01 subcompetency (regression coefficient = 0.06 [95% CI, 0.05-0.07], P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results provide incremental validity evidence in support of Step 1 and Step 2 CK score and EM milestone rating uses.

Progress testing in clinical science education: results of a pilot project between the National Board of Medical Examiners and a US Medical School.

BACKGROUND: Though progress tests have been used for several decades in various medical education settings, a few studies have offered analytic frameworks that could be used by practitioners to model growth of knowledge as a function of curricular and other variables of interest. AIM: To explore the use of one form of progress testing in clinical education by modeling growth of knowledge in various disciplines as well as by assessing the impact of recent training (core rotation order) on performance using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) frameworks. METHODS: This study included performances across four test administrations occurring between July 2006 and July 2007 for 130 students from a US medical school who graduated in 2008. Measures-nested-in-examinees HLM growth curve analyses were run to estimate clinical science knowledge growth over time and repeated measures ANOVAs were run to assess the effect of recent training on performance. RESULTS: Core rotation order was related to growth rates for total and pediatrics scores only. Additionally, scores were higher in a given discipline if training had occurred immediately prior to the test administration. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a useful progress testing framework for assessing medical students' growth of knowledge across their clinical science education and the related impact of training.

Medical Student Use of Electronic and Paper Health Records During Inpatient Clinical Clerkships: Results of a National Longitudinal Study.

PURPOSE: An important goal of medical education is to teach students to use an electronic health record (EHR) safely and effectively. The purpose of this study is to examine medical student accounts of EHR use during their core inpatient clinical clerkships using a national sample. Paper health records (PHRs) are similarly examined. METHOD: An online survey about health record use within the inpatient component of six core clerkships was administered to medical students after they completed Step 2 Clinical Knowledge of the United States Medical Licensing Examination. The sample included 17,202 U.S. medical students graduating between 2012 and 2016. Mean percentages of clerkships in which students engaged in various health record activities were computed, and analysis of variance was used to examine differences. RESULTS: The mean percentages of clerkships in which a student accessed or entered information into an EHR increased from 78% to 93% and 59% to 72%, respectively. For students who used an EHR, the mean percentage of clerkships in which they entered information remained constant at 76%. Students entered notes during the majority of their clerkships, with increases over time. However, students entered orders in less than a quarter of their clerkships, with decreases over time. The percentage of clerkships in which students used PHRs was lower and declining. CONCLUSIONS: Although students used an EHR in the majority of their inpatient core clerkships, they received limited educational experiences related to order and note writing, which could translate into a lack of preparedness for future training and practice.

A Multilevel analysis of the relationships between examinee gender and United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) step 2 CK content area performance.

PURPOSE: To examine the effect of (1) gender on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) content area performance, (2) gender on the relationships between Step 1 scores and Step 2 CK content area performance, and (3) medical school characteristics on the relationships between examinee characteristics and Step 2 CK content area performance. METHOD: The sample included 23,538 examinees from 136 Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited medical schools/campuses. Descriptive statistics were computed, and a series of examinees-nested-in-schools hierarchical linear models was conducted. RESULTS: Observed differences indicated that women generally outperformed men in most content areas and that controlling for Step 1 scores increased these gender-related score differences. Step 1 scores were more associated with Step 2 CK content area performance for men. School characteristics were generally unrelated to the relationships between examinee characteristics and Step 2 CK content area performance. CONCLUSIONS: While past research indicated that women outperformed men in some content areas, and men outperformed women in others, the current study revealed a somewhat different pattern, with women outperforming men in most content areas.

Exploring the Relationships Between USMLE Performance and Disciplinary Action in Practice: A Validity Study of Score Inferences From a Licensure Examination.

PURPOSE: Physicians must pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) to obtain an unrestricted license to practice allopathic medicine in the United States. Little is known, however, about how well USMLE performance relates to physician behavior in practice, particularly conduct inconsistent with safe, effective patient care. The authors examined the extent to which USMLE scores relate to the odds of receiving a disciplinary action from a U.S. state medical board. METHOD: Controlling for multiple factors, the authors used non-nested multilevel logistic regression analyses to estimate the relationships between scores and receiving an action. The sample included 164,725 physicians who graduated from U.S. MD-granting medical schools between 1994 and 2006. RESULTS: Physicians had a mean Step 1 score of 214 (standard deviation [SD] = 21) and a mean Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score of 213 (SD = 23). Of the physicians, 2,205 (1.3%) received at least one action. Physicians with higher Step 2 CK scores had lower odds of receiving an action. A 1-SD increase in Step 2 CK scores corresponded to a decrease in the chance of disciplinary action by roughly 25% (odds ratio = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.70-0.80). After accounting for Step 2 CK scores, Step 1 scores were unrelated to the odds of receiving an action. CONCLUSIONS: USMLE Step 2 CK scores provide useful information about the odds a physician will receive an official sanction for problematic practice behavior. These results provide validity evidence supporting current interpretation and use of Step 2 CK scores.

A multilevel analysis of the relationships between selected examinee characteristics and United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge performance: revisiting old findings and asking new questions.

BACKGROUND: This study examines: (1) the relationships between examinee characteristics and United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) performance; (2) the effect of gender and examination timing (time per item) on the relationship between Steps 1 and 2 CK; and (3) the effect of school characteristics on the relationships between examinee characteristics and Step 2 CK performance. METHOD: A series of hierarchical linear models (examinees-nested-in-schools) predicting Step 2 CK scores was fit to the data set. The sample included 54,487 examinees from 114 U.S. Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited medical schools. RESULTS: Consistent with past examinee-level research, women generally outperformed men on Step 2 CK, and examinees who received more time per item generally outperformed examinees who received less time per item. Step 1 score was generally more strongly associated with Step 2 CK performance for men and for examinees who received less time per item. School-level characteristics (size, average Step 1 performance) influenced the relationship between Steps 1 and 2 CK. CONCLUSION: Both examinee-level and school-level characteristics are important for understanding Step 2 CK performance.

Use of the mini-clinical evaluation exercise to rate examinee performance on a multiple-station clinical skills examination: a validity study.

BACKGROUND: Multivariate generalizability analysis was used to investigate the performance of a commonly used clinical evaluation tool. METHOD: Practicing physicians were trained to use the mini-Clinical Skills Examination (CEX) rating form to rate performances from the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills examination. RESULTS: Differences in rater stringency made the greatest contribution to measurement error; more raters rating each examinee, even on fewer occasions, could enhance score stability. Substantial correlated error across the competencies suggests that decisions about one scale unduly influence those on others. CONCLUSIONS: Given the appearance of a halo effect across competencies, score interpretations that assume assessment of distinct dimensions of clinical performance should be made with caution. If the intention is to produce a single composite score by combining results across competencies, the presence of these effects may be less critical.

Evaluating Validity Evidence for USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills Data Gathering and Data Interpretation Scores: Does Performance Predict History-Taking and Physical Examination Ratings for First-Year Internal Medicine Residents?

PURPOSE: To add to the small body of validity research addressing whether scores from performance assessments of clinical skills are related to performance in supervised patient settings, the authors examined relationships between United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) data gathering and data interpretation scores and subsequent performance in history taking and physical examination in internal medicine residency training. METHOD: The sample included 6,306 examinees from 238 internal medicine residency programs who completed Step 2 CS for the first time in 2005 and whose performance ratings from their first year of residency training were available. Hierarchical linear modeling techniques were used to examine the relationships among Step 2 CS data gathering and data interpretation scores and history-taking and physical examination ratings. RESULTS: Step 2 CS data interpretation scores were positively related to both history-taking and physical examination ratings. Step 2 CS data gathering scores were not related to either history-taking or physical examination ratings after other USMLE scores were taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: Step 2 CS data interpretation scores provide useful information for predicting subsequent performance in history taking and physical examination in supervised practice and thus provide validity evidence for their intended use as an indication of readiness to enter supervised practice. The results show that there is less evidence to support the usefulness of Step 2 CS data gathering scores. This study provides important information for practitioners interested in Step 2 CS specifically or in performance assessments of medical students' clinical skills more generally.

Predicting Peer Nominations Among Medical Students: A Social Network Approach.

PURPOSE: Minimal attention has been paid to what factors may predict peer nomination or how peer nominations might exhibit a clustering effect. Focusing on the homophily principle that "birds of a feather flock together," and using a social network analysis approach, the authors investigated how certain student- and/or school-based factors might predict the likelihood of peer nomination, and the clusters, if any, that occur among those nominations. METHOD: In 2013, the Jefferson Longitudinal Study of Medical Education included a special instrument to evaluate peer nominations. A total of 211 (81%) of 260 graduating medical students from the Sidney Kimmel Medical College responded to the peer nomination question. Data were analyzed using a relational contingency table and an ANOVA density model. RESULTS: Although peer nominations did not cluster around gender, age, or class rank, those students within an accelerated program, as well as those entering certain specialties, were more likely to nominate each other. The authors suggest that clerkships in certain specialties, as well as the accelerated program, may provide structured opportunities for students to connect and integrate, and that these opportunities may have an impact on peer nomination. The findings suggest that social network analysis is a useful approach to examine various aspects of peer nomination processes. CONCLUSIONS: The authors discuss implications regarding harnessing social cohesion within clinical clerkships, the possible development of siloed departmental identity and in-group favoritism, and future research possibilities.