Storied reflections: Development of a longitudinal interdisciplinary curriculum to improve patient-provider communication.

Objective: This article details the development of an interdisciplinary graduate medical education (GME) narrative curriculum. Methods: Descriptive statistics were conducted for the narrative session surveys. Two separate qualitative analyses were conducted. First, content and thematic analyses of the open-ended questions in the survey using NVIVO software occurred. Second, an inductive analysis of the participants' 54 stories was performed to identify unique themes not related to the prompt topics. Results: Quantitative survey results demonstrated that 84% of learners' felt the session benefited their personal or professional sense of wellbeing and resilience, 90% of learners believed the sessions aided in their ability to listen more effectively, and 86% of learners could apply what they practiced or witnessed. Qualitative analysis of survey data showed learners focused on patient care and listening. Thematic analysis of participants' narratives revealed strong feelings and emotions, struggles with time management, increase in self- and other-awareness, and challenges managing job-life balance. Conclusion: The longitudinal interdisciplinary Write-Read-Reflect narrative exchange curriculum is cost-effective, sustainable, and demonstrably valuable to learners and their program directors across multiple disciplines. Innovation: The program was designed for 4 graduate programs' learners to simultaneously experience a narrative exchange model to improve patient-provider communication, support professional resilience, and deepen relationship-centered care skills.

The American College of Academic International Medicine 2017 Consensus Statement on International Medical Programs: Establishing a system of objective valuation and quantitative metrics to facilitate the recognition and incorporation of academic international medical efforts into existing promotion and tenure paradigms.

The growth of academic international medicine (AIM) as a distinct field of expertise resulted in increasing participation by individual and institutional actors from both high-income and low-and-middle-income countries. This trend resulted in the gradual evolution of international medical programs (IMPs). With the growing number of students, residents, and educators who gravitate toward nontraditional forms of academic contribution, the need arose for a system of formalized metrics and quantitative assessment of AIM- and IMP-related efforts. Within this emerging paradigm, an institution's "return on investment" from faculty involvement in AIM and participation in IMPs can be measured by establishing equivalency between international work and various established academic activities that lead to greater institutional visibility and reputational impact. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide a basic framework for quantitative assessment and standardized metrics of professional effort attributable to active faculty engagement in AIM and participation in IMPs. Implicit to the current work is the understanding that the proposed system should be flexible and adaptable to the dynamically evolving landscape of AIM - an increasingly important subset of general academic medical activities.