The prism model: advancing a theory of practice for arts and humanities in medical education.

INTRODUCTION: The arts and humanities have transformative potential for medical education. Realizing this potential requires an understanding of what arts and humanities teaching is and what it aims to do. A 2016 review of exclusively quantitative studies mapped three discursive positions (art as intrinsic to, additive to or curative for medicine) and three epistemic functions (art for mastering skills, perspective taking, and personal growth and activism). A more inclusive sample might offer new insights into the position and function of arts and humanities teaching in medical education. METHODS: Informed by this 2016 framework, we conducted discursive and conceptual analyses of 769 citations from a database created in a recent scoping review. We also analyzed the 15 stakeholder interviews from this review for recurring themes. These three analyses were iteratively compared and combined to produce a model representing the complex relationship among discursive functions and learning domains. RESULTS: The literature largely positioned arts and humanities as additive to medicine and focused on the functions of mastering skills and perspective taking. Stakeholders emphasized the intrinsic value of arts and humanities and advocated their utility for social critique and change. We offer a refined theory of practice-the Prism Model of four functions (mastering skills, perspective taking, personal insight and social advocacy)-to support more strategic use of arts and humanities in medical education across all learning domains. DISCUSSION: The Prism Model encourages greater pedagogical flexibility and critical reflection in arts and humanities teaching, offering a foundation for achieving its transformative potential.

How Are the Arts and Humanities Used in Medical Education? Results of a Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Although focused reviews have characterized subsets of the literature on the arts and humanities in medical education, a large-scale overview of the field is needed to inform efforts to strengthen these approaches in medicine. METHOD: The authors conducted a scoping review in 2019 to identify how the arts and humanities are used to educate physicians and interprofessional learners across the medical education continuum in Canada and the United States. A search strategy involving 7 databases identified 21,985 citations. Five reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts. Full-text screening followed (n = 4,649). Of these, 769 records met the inclusion criteria. The authors performed descriptive and statistical analyses and conducted semistructured interviews with 15 stakeholders. RESULTS: The literature is dominated by conceptual works (n = 294) that critically engaged with arts and humanities approaches or generally called for their use in medical education, followed by program descriptions (n = 255). The literary arts (n = 197) were most common. Less than a third of records explicitly engaged theory as a strong component (n = 230). Of descriptive and empirical records (n = 424), more than half concerned undergraduate medical education (n = 245). There were gaps in the literature on interprofessional education, program evaluation, and learner assessment. Programming was most often taught by medical faculty who published their initiatives (n = 236). Absent were voices of contributing artists, docents, and other arts and humanities practitioners from outside medicine. Stakeholders confirmed that these findings resonated with their experiences. CONCLUSIONS: This literature is characterized by brief, episodic installments, privileging a biomedical orientation and largely lacking a theoretical frame to weave the installments into a larger story that accumulates over time and across subfields. These findings should inform efforts to promote, integrate, and study uses of the arts and humanities in medical education.