The Leaders in Epidemiology, Antimicrobial Stewardship, and Public Health (LEAP) Fellowship, a Novel Training Program in Public Health for Infectious Diseases Physicians.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic demonstrated a critical need for partnerships between practicing infectious diseases (ID) physicians and public health departments. The soon-to-launch combined ID and Epidemic Intelligence Service fellowship can only address a fraction of this need, and otherwise US ID training lacks development pathways for physicians aiming to make careers working with public health departments. The Leaders in Epidemiology, Antimicrobial Stewardship, and Public Health (LEAP) fellowship is a model compatible with the current training paradigm with a proven track record of developing careers of long-term collaboration. Established in 2017 by the ID Society of America, Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America, Pediatric ID Society, and supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, LEAP is a single-year in-place, structured training for senior trainees and early career ID physicians. In this viewpoint, we describe the LEAP fellowship, its outcomes, and how it could be adapted into ID training.

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.

Student and Teacher Perspectives on Equity in Clinical Feedback: A Qualitative Study Using a Critical Race Theory Lens.

PURPOSE: The authors aimed to gain a better understanding of students' and teachers' perspectives about whether clinical clerkship feedback is provided equitably irrespective of a student's race/ethnicity. METHOD: A secondary analysis of existing interview data was conducted, focusing on racial/ethnic disparities in clinical grading. Data had been acquired from 29 students and 30 teachers at 3 U.S. medical schools. The authors performed secondary coding on all 59 transcripts, writing memos focused on statements related to aspects of feedback equity and developing a template for coding students' and teachers' observations and descriptions specific to clinical feedback. Using the template, memos were coded, and thematic categories emerged describing perspectives on clinical feedback. RESULTS: Forty-eight (22 teachers and 26 students) participants' transcripts provided narratives about feedback. Both student and teacher narratives described how students who are racially/ethnically underrepresented in medicine may receive less helpful formative clinical feedback needed for professional development. Thematic analysis of narratives yielded 3 themes related to feedback inequities: 1) teachers' racial/ethnic biases influence the feedback they provide students, 2) teachers have limited skill sets to provide equitable feedback, and 3) racial/ethnic inequities in the clinical learning environment shape clinical and feedback experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Narratives indicated that both students and teachers perceived racial/ethnic inequities in clinical feedback. Teacher- and learning environment-related factors influenced these racial/ethnic inequities. These results can inform medical education's efforts to mitigate biases in the learning environment and provide equitable feedback to ensure every student has what they need to develop into the competent physician they aspire to be.

Identifying Value Factors in Institutional Leaders' Perspectives on Investing in Health Professions Educators.

Importance: Investing in educators, educational innovation, and scholarship is essential for excellence in health professions education and health care. Funds for education innovations and educator development remain at significant risk because they virtually never generate offsetting revenue. A broader shared framework is needed to determine the value of such investments. Objective: To explore the value factors using the value measurement methodology domains (individual, financial, operational, social or societal, strategic or political) that health professions leaders placed on educator investment programs, including intramural grants and endowed chairs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with participants from an urban academic health professions institution and its affiliated systems that were conducted between June and September 2019 and were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes with a constructivist orientation. Participants included 31 leaders at multiple levels of the organization (eg, deans, department chairs, and health system leaders) and with a range of experience. Individuals who did not respond initially were followed up with until a sufficient representation of leader roles was achieved. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes include value factors defined by the leaders for educator investment programs across the 5 value measurement methodology domains: individual, financial, operational, social or societal, and strategic or political. Results: This study included 29 leaders (5 [17%] campus or university leaders; 3 [10%] health systems leaders; 6 [21%] health professions school leaders; 15 [52%] department leaders). They identified value factors across the 5 value measurement methods domains. Individual factors emphasized the impact on faculty career, stature, and personal and professional development. Financial factors included tangible support, the ability to attract additional resources, and the importance of these investments as a monetary input rather than output. Operational factors identified educational programs and faculty recruitment or retention. Social and societal factors showcased scholarship and dissemination benefits to the external community beyond the organization and to the internal community of faculty, learners, and patients. Strategic and political factors highlighted impact on culture and symbolism, innovation, and organizational success. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that health sciences and health system leaders find value in funding educator investment programs in multiple domains beyond direct financial return on investment. These value factors can inform program design and evaluation, effective feedback to leaders, and advocacy for future investments. This approach can be used by other institutions to identify context-specific value factors.

Faculty Development for Education for Sustainable Health Care: A University System-Wide Initiative to Transform Health Professional Education.

Health professionals (HPs) are increasingly called upon to care for patients experiencing the health impacts of climate change, while working in the high eco-footprint health care system, which is starting to embrace a culture of sustainability. HPs are uniquely positioned to drive health care culture toward ecological responsibility and, consequently, improve patient care, health equity, and public health. Education for sustainable health care (ESHC or ESH) is the first step in developing health care practitioners able to think critically about and act upon the health impacts of the climate crisis. University of California Education for Sustainable Healthcare (UC-ESH) Faculty Development Initiative was developed to address the following goals: educate faculty on eco-medical literacy, empower faculty to build community and lead ESH at their institutions, and expand coverage of ESH to reach students beyond those for whom sustainability is already a focus. The initiative provided training to faculty across health professions and 6 health science campuses to integrate ESH into their courses using the train-the-trainer model, key knowledge and pedagogical skills, and longitudinal guidance and networking opportunities. Using a survey, questionnaire, and interviews, the initiative was evaluated using the process/elements and product/outcomes steps of the Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model. The UC-ESH educated over 100 faculty members and led to ESH integration into 99 existing and new courses that subsequently reached over 7,000 learners. The UC-ESH increased empowerment, awareness, and knowledge about the climate crisis, and built an ESH community of practice. Initiative elements that contributed to these outcomes included engaging training; creation of supportive group dynamics; helpful resources and activities; ongoing support; and integration approaches to ESH. This university-system-wide initiative provides a transferable model to institutions, schools, and departments seeking to develop eco-medical literate faculty who educate their students about the climate, ecosystem, and health crisis.

Interview Without Harm: Reimagining Medical Training's Financially and Environmentally Costly Interview Practices.

The looming threat of climate change urgently calls for reimagining unsustainable systems and practices, including academia's culture of emissions-intensive travel. Given that medical educators are uniquely invested in the future of the trainees they represent, this reimagination can and should begin with medical education. Making significant reforms to the application process has historically been challenging, but the COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed an abrupt shift from in-person to virtual interviews for medical school, residency, and fellowship. Programs and applicants alike demonstrated resilience, innovation, and satisfaction in adapting to virtual interviews during 2 full application cycles. This restructuring has prompted consideration of the necessity of environmentally costly, expensive, and time-consuming cross-country travel for single-day interviews. However, evolving conversations about the future of medical training interviews have not prioritized environmental impact, despite the sizeable historical emissions generated by interview-related travel and the incompatibility between ecological damage and population health. Beyond environmental impact, virtual interviews are more equitable, with significantly fewer financial costs, and they are more efficient, requiring less time off from school or work. Many concerns associated with virtual interviews, including interview inflation and limited applicant exposure to programs and their surrounding areas, can be addressed via creative and structural solutions, such as interview caps and in-person second-look programs. The medical training interview process underwent a forced restructuring due to the unprecedented disruption caused by COVID-19. This moment presents a strategic inflection point for medical education leadership to build on the momentum and permanently transform the process by focusing on sustainability and equity.

The Clinical Microsystems Clerkship at University of California, San Francisco: Integrating Clinical Skills and Health Systems Improvement for Early Medical Students.

PROBLEM: Medical educators recognize that partnering actively with health system leaders closes significant health care experience, quality, and outcomes gaps. Medical schools have explored innovations training physicians to care for both individual patients and populations while improving systems of care. Yet, early medical student education fails to include systems improvement as foundational skills. When health systems science is taught, it is often separated from core clinical skills. APPROACH: The Clinical Microsystems Clerkship at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, launched in 2016, integrates clinical skills training with health systems improvement from the start of medical school. Guided by communities of practice and workplace learning principles, it embeds first-year and second-year students in longitudinal clinical microsystems with physician coaches and interprofessional clinicians one day per week. Students learn medical history, physical examination, patient communication, interprofessional teamwork, and health systems improvement. Assessments include standardized patient examinations and improvement project reports. Program outcome measures include student satisfaction and attitudes, clinical skills performance, and evidence of systems improvement learning, including dissemination and scholarship. OUTCOMES: Students reported high satisfaction (first-year, 4.10; second-year, 4.29, on a scale of 1-5) and value (4.14) in their development as physicians. Clinical skills assessment accuracy was high (70%-96%). Guided by interprofessional clinicians across 15 departments, students completed 258 improvement projects in 3 health systems (academic, safety net, Veterans Affairs). Sample projects reduced disparities in hypertension, improved opiate safety, and decreased readmissions. Graduating students reported both clinical skills and health systems knowledge as important to physician success, patient experience, and clinical outcomes (4.73). Most graduates discussed their projects in residency applications (85%) and disseminated related papers and presentations (54%). NEXT STEPS: Integrating systems improvement, interprofessional teamwork, and clinical skills training can redefine early medical student education. Health system perspectives, long-term outcomes, and sustainability merit further exploration.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Clerkship Grading: Perspectives of Students and Teachers.

PURPOSE: Racial/ethnic disparities exist in clinical clerkship grading, yet little is known about medical student and faculty perspectives on why these disparities occur. This study explored what happens during clerkships that might explain grading disparities. METHOD: Medical students and clerkship teachers at 3 U.S. medical schools completed a demographic survey and semistructured interview. The constant comparative method was used to analyze transcripts by inductively developing codes; grouping codes in categories; and refining codes, descriptions, and group assignments to identify themes. Interpretations of and relationships among themes were iteratively discussed to develop a grounded theory. RESULTS: Fifty-nine participants (29 medical students, 30 teachers [28 clinical faculty, 2 residents]) were interviewed in 2020. The Social Milieu of Medical Education (relationships, fit, opportunities, and judgments in the clinical-learning setting) was the organizing theme, influenced by 5 additional themes: Societal Influence (experiences in society), Students' Characteristics and Background (personal characteristics and experiences outside medical school), Assessment Processes (collection of student performance data and how data inform grades), Learning Environment (resources available and messaging within the clinical setting), and Students' Interactions and Reactions (interactions with and reactions to peers and teachers). The grounded theory highlights complex, multilayered aspects of how the social milieu of medical education is shaped by and shapes students' experiences, relationships, and clerkship assessments and promotes clerkship-grading disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Mitigating clerkship-grading disparities will require intervening on interrelated, contextual factors to provide equitable opportunities for students from diverse backgrounds and with varying styles of engagement in clinical-learning settings, along with attending to modifying assessment processes.

The Tea House Series: Striving Together to be Antiracist.

BACKGROUND: Though awareness of health care structures that are racist and oppressive is increasing among health care professionals, there is a gap in continuing education curricula focused on antiracist anti-oppressive practices, and limited faculty and staff development to guide individuals towards action. AIM: To develop, implement, and evaluate a novel antiracist faculty and staff development program called the Tea House Series. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A five-part continuing education series with an accompanying online community for faculty and staff at the divisions of Hospital Medicine in one institution in the western United States. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The four foundational pillars integral to the Tea House Series were as follows: educational framework based on the pedagogy of Paulo Freire, local disparities data, welcoming space to establish a community of practice and accountability. Each session contained participant dialogue in small group activities. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Qualitative analysis of participant survey responses demonstrated transformation towards a hope to act with a sense of community. Quantitative analysis measured increased confidence for the program learning objectives. DISCUSSION: The Tea House Series may be used as a model for continuing education to provide the tools and the community to confront systems of racism and oppression in any institution.

Patient Advocacy Assessment in the Medicine Clerkship: A Qualitative Study of Definition, Context, and Impact.

BACKGROUND: Advocacy is a core value of the medical profession. However, patient advocacy (advocacy) is not uniformly assessed and there are no studies of the behaviors clinical supervisors consider when assessing advocacy. OBJECTIVE: To explore how medical students and supervisors characterize advocacy during an internal medicine clerkship, how assessment of advocacy impacted students and supervisors, and elements that support effective implementation of advocacy assessment. DESIGN: A constructivist qualitative paradigm was used to understand advocacy assessment from the perspectives of students and supervisors. PARTICIPANTS: Medical students who completed the internal medicine clerkship at UCSF during the 2018 and 2019 academic years and supervisors who evaluated students during this period. APPROACH: Supervisor comments from an advocacy assessment item in the medicine clerkship and transcripts of focus groups were used to explore which behaviors students and supervisors deem to be advocacy. Separate focus groups with both students and supervisors examined the impact that advocacy assessment had on students' and supervisors' perceptions of advocacy and what additional context was necessary to effectively implement advocacy assessment. KEY RESULTS: Students and supervisors define advocacy as identifying and addressing social determinants of health, recognizing and addressing patient wishes and concerns, navigating the health care system, conducting appropriate evaluation and treatment, and creating exceptional therapeutic alliances. Effective implementation of advocacy assessment requires the creation of non-hierarchical team environments, supervisor role modeling, and pairing assessment with teaching of advocacy skills. Inclusion of advocacy assessment reflects and dictates institutional priorities, shapes professional identity formation, and enhances advocacy skill development for students and their supervisors. CONCLUSIONS: Students and supervisors consider advocacy to be a variety of behaviors beyond identifying and addressing social determinants of health. Effectively implementing advocacy assessment shapes students' professional identity formation, underscoring the critical importance of formally focusing on this competency in the health professions education.

A is for advocacy: How introducing student advocacy assessment impacts longitudinal integrated clerkship students and clinical supervisors.

To improve health, physicians are increasingly called to advocate. Yet medical schools have only recently focused on health advocacy skill-building. Limited work to date addresses assessing medical student advocacy on behalf of patients. We describe how students and clinical supervisors (CS) in two urban longitudinal integrated clerkships (LIC) experience patient advocacy and how introducing a new advocacy assessment impacts them. Using a thematic approach, we analyzed transcripts of focus groups during 2018-2019. Seventeen of 24 (71%) students and 15 of 21 (71%) CS participated in the focus groups. We describe how students perceive their advocacy role as they accompany the patient, amplify their voice, and facilitate connection. The rationale for advocacy assessment includes that it (1) adds a novel dimension to the written and verbal assessment, (2) drives student learning, (3) aligns with the institutional goal to promote equity, and (4) impacts CS teaching and clinical practice. Challenges are the ambiguity of expectations, pressure to 'perform,' and a moral overlay to advocacy assessment. Findings demonstrate how educational alliances between students and CS and longitudinal relationships between LIC students and patients offer a constructive opportunity for advocacy assessment. We describe suggestions to hone and expand the reach of advocacy assessment.

First year medical student perceptions of physician advocacy and advocacy as a core competency: A qualitative analysis.

PURPOSE: Medical societies have embraced advocacy as a core professional competency, but little is known about how entering medical students view physician advocacy. This study examined how first year medical students define advocacy, their motivations for and anticipated challenges to advocacy, and whether they believe advocacy should be a core competency. METHOD: This study used a qualitative content analysis approach to analyze first year medical student narrative responses about physician advocacy. The analysis included the written responses of 95% of the first-year medical students at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine during two academic years. RESULTS: Students shared consensus that physicians should advocate on behalf of their individual patients. Students had varying opinions on whether all physicians should engage in societal level advocacy and whether it should be a core competency in medical school. Students find several compelling reasons for physicians to engage in societal advocacy but nevertheless anticipate challenges to physician advocacy. CONCLUSION: Given increasing consensus that advocacy is a core competency of physicians, providing medical students the skills to successfully engage in advocacy is increasingly important. Any new mandatory curricula will need to focus on how to engage learners with varied views on advocacy.

From Grading to Assessment for Learning: A Qualitative Study of Student Perceptions Surrounding Elimination of Core Clerkship Grades and Enhanced Formative Feedback.

Problem: Medical students perceive honors grading during core clerkships as unfair and inequitable, and negatively impacting their learning and wellbeing. Eliminating honors grading, a powerful extrinsic motivator, and emphasizing formative feedback may address these problems and promote intrinsic motivation and learning. However, it is unknown how transitioning from honors to pass/fail grading with enhanced formative feedback in the core clerkship year may affect student learning experiences, wellbeing, and perceptions of the learning environment. Intervention: Core clerkship grading was transitioned from honors/pass/fail to pass/fail at one US medical school. In addition, the requirement for students to obtain formative supervisor feedback was formalized to twice per week. Context: This qualitative study utilized semi-structured interviews to explore the perceptions among core clerkship students of learning and assessment. Interview questions addressed motivation, wellbeing, learning behaviors, team dynamics, feedback, and student and supervisor attitudes regarding assessment changes. The authors analyzed data inductively using thematic analysis informed by sensitizing concepts related to theories of motivation (goal orientation theory and self-determination theory). Impact: Eighteen students participated, including five with experience in both honors-eligible and pass/fail clerkships. The authors identified three major themes in students' descriptions of the change in approach to assessment: student engagement in clerkships, wellbeing, and recognition of learning context. Student engagement subthemes included intrinsic motivation for patient care rather than performing; sense of agency over learning, including ability to set learning priorities, seek and receive feedback, take learning risks, and disagree with supervisors, and collaborative relationships with peers and team members. Positive wellbeing was characterized by low stress, sense of authenticity with team members, prioritized physical health, and attention to personal life. Learning context subthemes included recognition of variability of clerkship contexts with pass/fail grading mitigating fairness and equity concerns, support of the grading change from residents and some attendings, and implications surrounding future stress and residency selection. Lessons Learned: Students perceive a transition from honors grading to pass/fail with increased feedback as supporting their engagement in learning, intrinsic motivation, and wellbeing. Drivers of wellbeing appear to include students' feelings of control, achieved through the ability to seek learning opportunities, teaching, and constructive feedback without the perceived need to focus on impressing others. Ongoing evaluation of the consequences of this shift in assessment is needed.

A Narrative Study of Equity in Clinical Assessment Through the Antideficit Lens.

PURPOSE: Efforts to address inequities in medical education are centered on a dialogue of deficits that highlight negative underrepresented in medicine (UIM) learner experiences and lower performance outcomes. An alternative narrative explores perspectives on achievement and equity in assessment. This study sought to understand UIM learner perceptions of successes and equitable assessment practices. METHOD: Using narrative research, investigators selected a purposeful sample of self-identified UIM fourth-year medical students and senior-level residents and conducted semistructured interviews. Questions elicited personal stories of achievement during clinical training, clinical assessment practices that captured achievement, and equity in clinical assessment. Using re-storying and thematic analysis, investigators coded transcripts and synthesized data into themes and representative stories. RESULTS: Twenty UIM learners (6 medical students and 14 residents) were interviewed. Learners often thought about equity during clinical training and provided personal definitions of equity in assessment. Learners shared stories that reflected their achievements in patient care, favorable assessment outcomes, and growth throughout clinical training. Sound assessments that captured achievements included frequent observations with real-time feedback on predefined expectations by supportive, longitudinal clinical supervisors. Finally, equitable assessment systems were characterized as sound assessment systems that also avoided comparison to peers, used narrative assessment, assessed patient care and growth, trained supervisors to avoid bias, and acknowledged learner identity. CONCLUSIONS: UIM learners characterized equitable and sound assessment systems that captured achievements during clinical training. These findings guide future efforts to create an inclusive, fair, and equitable clinical assessment experience.

Toward Creating Equity in Awards Received During Medical School: Strategic Changes at One Institution.

Membership in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society (AΩA) is a widely recognized achievement valued by residency selection committees and employers. Yet research has shown selection favors students from racial/ethnic groups not underrepresented in medicine (not-UIM). The authors describe efforts to create equity in AΩA selection at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, through implementation of a holistic selection process, starting with the class of 2017, and present outcomes.Informed by the definition of holistic review, medical school leaders applied strategic changes grounded in evidence on inclusion, mitigating bias, and increasing opportunity throughout the AΩA selection process. These addressed increasing selection committee diversity, revising selection criteria and training committee members to review applications using a new instrument, broadening student eligibility and inviting applications, reviewing blinded applications, and making final selection decisions based on review and discussion of a rank-ordered list of students that equally weighted academic achievement and professional contributions.The authors compared AΩA eligibility and selection outcomes for 3 classes (2014-2016) during clerkship metric-driven selection, which prioritized academic achievement, and 3 classes (2017-2019) during holistic selection. During clerkship metric-driven selection, not-UIM students were 4 times more likely than UIM students to be eligible for AΩA (P = .001) and 3 times more likely to be selected (P = .001). During holistic selection, not-UIM students were 2 times more likely than UIM students to be eligible for AΩA (P = .001); not-UIM and UIM students were similarly likely to be selected (odds ratio = .7, P = .12)This new holistic selection process created equity in representation of UIM students among students selected for AΩA. Centered on equity pedagogy, which advocates dismantling structures that create inequity, this holistic selection process has implications for creating equity in awards selection during medical education.

A framework to promote equity in clinical clerkships.

BACKGROUND: Diversifying the medical student body without striving for equity in the clerkship (first full-time clinical training year) learning environment disadvantages under-represented in medicine (UIM) students and undermines the educational process. CONTEXT: To characterise and address inequities within an internal medicine clerkship, we conducted a multi-phased process to promote equity in the clerkship learning environment at an urban medical school with multiple sites. … we conducted a multi-phased process to promote equity in the clerkship learning environment … INNOVATION: The process to improve the learning environment and equity in the clerkship included: (i) a literature review and needs assessment (focus group) with UIM students; (ii) a medicine clerkship retreat with school leaders and diversity experts to reflect on the needs assessment data and generate interventions to improve equity; (iii) a member checking session with UIM students to ensure that the proposed solutions addressed the inequities that were noted in the needs assessment. IMPLICATIONS: The needs assessment revealed eight themes in the clerkship learning environment that were mapped to a published framework describing barriers encountered by UIM students. These themes informed the development of five clerkship pilot interventions. Implementing interventions inspired by UIM student perspectives may improve the learning environment in clinical clerkships by encouraging a culture of equity. The three-phased approach described here provides leaders who direct educational programmes with a framework to initiate change by characterising inequities as a springboard for developing solutions.

What Do Medical Students Do and Want When Caring for "Difficult Patients"?

Phenomenon: Medical students, like physicians, experience negative emotions such as frustration when interacting with some patients, and many of these interactions occur for the first time during clinical clerkships. Students receive preclinical training in the social and behavioral sciences, often including learning about "difficult patient" interactions, yet little is known about their desire for training during clinical education. We explored students' strategies in these difficult clinical interactions, whether they felt prepared by the curriculum, and what support they would have liked. These data inform proposed strategies for supporting clinical learning. Approach: We interviewed 4th-year students about interactions with patients toward whom they felt negative emotions and sought to identify strategies and supports needed in these interactions. Interviews ended when theoretical sufficiency was achieved. We used qualitative content analysis to organize strategies into themes about areas benefiting from curricular supports. We mapped students' desired curricular support examples to cognitive apprenticeship teaching methods-modeling, coaching, reflection, scaffolding, exploration, and articulation-and aligned them with traditional pedagogical techniques. Findings: We interviewed 26 medical students (44 volunteered/180 invited). Their strategies formed five themes: finding empathy (with a subtheme of focusing on social determinants of health), using learned communication approaches, anticipating challenging interactions, seeking support, and considering it an opportunity for more responsibility. Students described ideal clinical teaching, including postinteraction debriefs with an emphasis on validating their emotional reactions and challenges. Students mentioned all cognitive apprenticeship teaching methods, most prominently modeling (observing supervisors in such interactions) and supported oral reflection. They also identified a need for faculty and resident development to enact these teaching methods. Insights: Although students use some learned strategies in interactions in which they feel negative emotions toward patients, they desire more preparation and support during their clinical rotations. Their desires map to traditional pedagogical techniques and to methods of cognitive apprenticeship. Our findings point to the need to use these techniques to enhance clinical learning for students who experience emotionally challenging patient interactions.