Social network analysis of publication collaboration of accelerating change in MedEd consortium.

INTRODUCTION: The American Medical Association formed the Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium through grants to effect change in medical education. The dissemination of educational innovations through scholarship was a priority. The objective of this study was to explore the patterns of collaboration of educational innovation through the consortium's publications. METHOD: Publications were identified from grantee schools' semi-annual reports. Each publication was coded for the number of citations, Altmetric score, domain of scholarship, and collaboration with other institutions. Social network analysis explored relationships at the midpoint and end of the grant. RESULTS: Over five years, the 32 Consortium institutions produced 168 publications, ranging from 38 papers from one institution to no manuscripts from another. The two most common domains focused on health system science (92 papers) and competency-based medical education (30 papers). Articles were published in 54 different journals. Forty percent of publications involved more than one institution. Social network analysis demonstrated rich publishing relationships within the Consortium members as well as beyond the Consortium schools. In addition, there was growth of the network connections and density over time. CONCLUSION: The Consortium fostered a scholarship network disseminating a broad range of educational innovations through publications of individual school projects and collaborations.

Realizing the vision of the Lancet Commission on Education of Health Professionals for the 21st Century: Transforming medical education through the Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium.

In the last two decades, prompted by the anticipated arrival of the 21st Century and on the centenary of the publication of the Flexner Report, many in medical education called for change to address the expanding chasm between the requirements of the health care system and the educational systems producing the health care workforce. Calls were uniform. Curricular content was missing. There was a mismatch in where people trained and where they were needed to practice, legacy approaches to pedagogical methods that needed to be challenged, an imbalance in diversity of trainees, and a lack of research on educational outcomes, resulting in a workforce that was described as ill-equipped to provide health care in the current and future environment. The Lancet Commission on Education of Health Professionals for the 21st Century published a widely acclaimed report in 2010 that called for a complete and authoritative re-examination of health professional education. This paper describes the innovations of the American Medical Association Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium schools as they relate to the recommendations of the Lancet Commission. We outline the successes, challenges, and lessons learned in working to deeply reform medical education.

Expanding innovation from undergraduate to graduate medical education: A path of continuous professional development.

A hundred years after the Flexner report laid the foundation for modern medical education, a number of authors commemorated the occasion by commenting on how the medical education system had to change once more to serve 21st century patients. Experts called for standardized outcomes and individualized learner pathways, integration of material across traditional areas, attention to an environment of inquiry, and professional identity formation. The medical education community responded and much has been achieved in the last decade, but much work remains to be done. In this paper we outline how the American Medical Association Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium, launched in 2013 through significant funding of transformation projects in undergraduate medical education, expanded its work into graduate medical education, and we look to the future of innovation in medical education.

Assessing the Transition of Training in Health Systems Science From Undergraduate to Graduate Medical Education.

BACKGROUND: The American Medical Association Accelerating Change in Medical Education (AMA-ACE) consortium proposes that medical schools include a new 3-pillar model incorporating health systems science (HSS) and basic and clinical sciences. One of the goals of AMA-ACE was to support HSS curricular innovation to improve residency preparation. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the effectiveness of HSS curricula by using a large dataset to link medical school graduates to internship Milestones through collaboration with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). METHODS: ACGME subcompetencies related to the schools' HSS curricula were identified for internal medicine, emergency medicine, family medicine, obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), pediatrics, and surgery. Analysis compared Milestone ratings of ACE school graduates to non-ACE graduates at 6 and 12 months using generalized estimating equation models. RESULTS: At 6 months both groups demonstrated similar HSS-related levels of Milestone performance on the selected ACGME competencies. At 1 year, ACE graduates in OB/GYN scored minimally higher on 2 systems-based practice (SBP) subcompetencies compared to non-ACE school graduates: SBP01 (1.96 vs 1.82, 95% CI 0.03-0.24) and SBP02 (1.87 vs 1.79, 95% CI 0.01-0.16). In internal medicine, ACE graduates scored minimally higher on 3 HSS-related subcompetencies: SBP01 (2.19 vs 2.05, 95% CI 0.04-0.26), PBLI01 (2.13 vs 2.01; 95% CI 0.01-0.24), and PBLI04 (2.05 vs 1.93; 95% CI 0.03-0.21). For the other specialties examined, there were no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Graduates from schools with training in HSS had similar Milestone ratings for most subcompetencies and very small differences in Milestone ratings for only 5 subcompetencies across 6 specialties at 1 year, compared to graduates from non-ACE schools. These differences are likely not educationally meaningful.

The Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium: Key Drivers of Transformative Change.

The American Medical Association's (AMA's) Accelerating Change in Medical Education (ACE) initiative, launched in 2013 to foster advancements in undergraduate medical education, has led to the development and scaling of innovations influencing the full continuum of medical training. Initial grants of $1 million were awarded to 11 U.S. medical schools, with 21 schools joining the consortium in 2016 at a lower funding level. Almost one-fifth of all U.S. MD- and DO-granting medical schools are represented in the 32-member consortium. In the first 5 years, the consortium medical schools have delivered innovative educational experiences to approximately 19,000 medical students, who will provide a potential 33 million patient care visits annually. The core initiative objectives focus on competency-based approaches to medical education and individualized pathways for students, training in health systems science, and enhancing the learning environment. At the close of the initial 5-year grant period, AMA leadership sought to catalogue outputs and understand how the structure of the consortium may have influenced its outcomes. Themes from qualitative analysis of stakeholder interviews as well as other sources of evidence aligned with the 4 elements of the transformational leadership model (inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and idealized influence) and can be used to inform future innovation interventions. For example, the ACE initiative has been successful in stimulating change at the consortium schools and propagating those innovations broadly, with outputs involving medical students, faculty, medical schools, affiliated health systems, and the broader educational landscape. In summary, the ACE initiative has fostered a far-reaching community of innovation that will continue to drive change across the continuum of medical education.

A Proposed Shared Vision for Leadership Development for all Medical Students: A Call from a Coalition of Diverse Medical Schools.

Issue: Despite clear relevance, need, descriptive literature, and student interest, few schools offer required curriculum to develop leadership skills. This paper outlines a proposed shared vision for leadership development drawn from a coalition of diverse medical schools. We advocate that leadership development is about self (looking inward), teams (not hierarchy), and change (looking outward). We propose that leadership development is for all medical students, not for a subset, and we believe that leadership curricula and programs must be experiential and applied. Evidence: This paper also draws on the current literature and the experience of medical schools participating in the American Medical Association's (AMA) Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium, confronts the common arguments against leadership training in medical education, and provides three cross-cutting principles that we believe must each be incorporated in all medical student-centered leadership development programs as they emerge and evolve at medical schools. Implications: By confronting common arguments against leadership training and providing a framework for such training, we give medical educators important tools and insights into developing leadership training for all students at their institutions.

Students as catalysts for curricular innovation: A change management framework.

Introduction: The role of medical students in catalyzing and leading curricular change in US medical schools is not well described. Here, American Medical Association student and physician leaders in the Accelerating Change in Medical Education initiative use qualitative methods to better define student leadership in curricular change.Methods: The authors developed case studies describing student leadership in curricular change efforts. Case studies were presented at a national medical education workshop; participants provided worksheet reflections and were surveyed, and responses were transcribed. Kotter's change management framework was used to categorize reported student roles in curricular change. Thematic analysis was used to identify barriers to student engagement and activators to overcome these barriers.Results: Student roles spanned all eight steps of Kotter's change management framework. Barriers to student engagement were related to faculty (e.g. view student roles narrowly), students (e.g. fear change or expect faculty-led curricula), or both (e.g. lack leadership training). Activators were: (1) recruiting collaborative faculty, staff, and students; (2) broadening student leadership roles; (3) empowering student leaders; and (4) recognizing student successes.Conclusions: By applying these activators, medical schools can build robust student-faculty partnerships that maximize collaboration, moving students beyond passive educational consumption to change agency and curricular co-creation.

Stepping Back: Re-evaluating the Use of the Numeric Score in USMLE Examinations.

There are increasing concerns from medical educators about students' over-emphasis on preparing for a high-stakes licensing examination during medical school, especially the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. Residency program directors' use of the numeric score (otherwise known as the three-digit score) on Step 1 to screen and select applicants drive these concerns. Since the USMLE was not designed as a residency selection tool, the use of numeric scores for this purpose is often referred to as a secondary and unintended use of the USMLE score. Educators and students are concerned about USMLE's potentially negative influence on curricular innovation and the role of high-stakes examinations in student and trainee well-being. Changing the score reporting of the examinations from a numeric score to pass/fail has been suggested by some. This commentary first reviews the primary use and secondary uses of the USMLE scores. We then focus on the advantages and disadvantages of the currently reported numeric score using Messick's conceptualization of construct validity as our framework. Finally, we propose a path forward to design a comprehensive, more holistic review of residency candidates.

A Responsible Educational Handover: Improving Communication to Improve Learning.

An important tenet of competency-based medical education is that the educational continuum should be seamless. The transition from undergraduate medical education (UME) to graduate medical education (GME) is far from seamless, however. Current practices around this transition drive students to focus on appearing to be competitively prepared for residency. A communication at the completion of UME-an educational handover-would encourage students to focus on actually preparing for the care of patients. In April 2018, the American Medical Association's Accelerating Change in Medical Education consortium meeting included a debate and discussion on providing learner performance measures as part of a responsible educational handover from UME to GME. In this Perspective, the authors describe the resulting 5 recommendations for developing such a handover: (1) The purpose of the educational handover should be to provide medical school performance data to guide continued improvement in learner ability and performance, (2) the process used to create an educational handover should be philosophically and practically aligned with the learner's continuous quality improvement, (3) the educational handover should be learner driven with a focus on individualized learning plans that are coproduced by the learner and a coach or advisor, (4) the transfer of information within an educational handover should be done in a standardized format, and (5) together, medical schools and residency programs must invest in adequate infrastructure to support learner improvement. These recommendations are shared to encourage implementation of the educational handover and to generate a potential research agenda that can inform policy and best practices.

The American Medical Association Medical Education Innovation Challenge: Incorporating the Student Voice Into Medical Education Transformation.

PROBLEM: Medical education needs to evolve to continue producing physicians who are able to meet the needs of diverse patient populations. Students can be a unique source of ideas about medical education transformation. APPROACH: In the fall of 2015, the authors created the American Medical Association Medical Education Innovation Challenge, an incentive-based competition for teams of two to four students. The challenge called for teams to "turn medical education on its head" by proposing a change to some aspect of medical education that would better prepare students to meet the health care needs of the future. OUTCOMES: Teams submitted 154 proposals. Themes from the winning teams and those that received an honorable mention included innovative uses of technology, creating physical spaces to pursue solutions to health care problems, wellness education, and longitudinal learning experiences around health equity and advocacy. The authors invited all teams to submit an abstract of their proposal to be published in an abstract book. The four winning teams and the 24 teams that received an honorable mention and submitted an abstract were surveyed to assess the impact of the challenge. Fifteen teams (54%) responded. Ten of those teams (67%) were implementing their idea or a related innovation to some degree. NEXT STEPS: The American Medical Association continues to run a wide variety of innovation challenges (e.g., Healthier Nation Innovation Challenge, Health Care Interoperability & Innovation Challenge) that draw in diverse stakeholders to solve problems in medical education and the health care system more broadly.

Beyond the United States Medical Licensing Examination Score: Assessing Competence for Entering Residency.

Assessments of physician learners during the transition from undergraduate to graduate medical education generate information that may inform their learning and improvement needs, determine readiness to move along the medical education continuum, and predict success in their residency programs. To achieve a constructive transition for the learner, residency program, and patients, high-quality assessments should provide meaningful information regarding applicant characteristics, academic achievement, and competence that lead to a suitable match between the learner and the residency program's culture and focus.The authors discuss alternative assessment models that may correlate with resident physician clinical performance and patient care outcomes. Currently, passing the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step examinations provides one element of reliable assessment data that could inform judgments about a learner's likelihood for success in residency. Yet, learner capabilities in areas beyond those traditionally valued in future physicians, such as life experiences, community engagement, language skills, and leadership attributes, are not afforded the same level of influence when candidate selections are made.While promising new methods of screening and assessment-such as objective structured clinical examinations, holistic assessments, and competency-based assessments-have attracted increased attention in the medical education community, currently they may be expensive, be less psychometrically sound, lack a national comparison group, or be complicated to administer. Future research and experimentation are needed to establish measures that can best meet the needs of programs, faculty, staff, students, and, more importantly, patients.

Engaging Medical Students in Leadership Development.

Leadership development plays a critical role in preparing collaborative, systems-based physicians. Medical schools across the globe have dedicated significant effort towards programming for medical student leadership development. Students report a variety of existing leadership opportunities, ranging from formal didactics to leadership positions within the community. Students identify lack of time, funding, and the hierarchy of medicine as significant barriers for engaging in leadership opportunities. Students favor a formal leadership curriculum coupled with hands-on opportunities to practice leadership skills. In order to train medical students to be engaged physician leaders, it is imperative to foster practical opportunities for leadership development.

A Student-Led National Conference on Leadership: Broadening the Medical Student Role.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Students have traditionally held a singular role in medical education - the learner. This narrow view neglects students unique perspective and ability to shape the future of medical education. In recognizing the need for deliberate leadership skill development and networking opportunities for medical student leaders, the American Medical Association (AMA) supported the first AMA Accelerating Change in Medical Education Student-Led Conference on Leadership in Medical Education. A planning committee of 19 students from seven medical schools collaborated to develop this conference, which took place on August 4-5, 2017 at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. The primary goal of the conference was for students to learn about leadership skills, connect with other student leaders, feel empowered to lead change, and continue to lead from their roles as students. Attendees participated in a variety of workshops and presentations focused on developing practical leadership skills. In addition, students formed multi-institutional teams to participate on in the MedEd Impact Challenge, attempting to address issues in medical education such as leadership curriculum development, wellness, and culture change. Post-conference surveys showed an overwhelming majority of students connected with other student leaders, shared ideas, developed collaborations, and felt empowered to enact change. Looking forward, we believe that similar student-led conferences focused on broadening the medical student role would provide avenues for positive change in medical education.

Value-Added Activities in Medical Education: A Multisite Survey of First- and Second-Year Medical Students' Perceptions and Factors Influencing Their Potential Engagement.

PURPOSE: To describe attitudes of first- and second-year U.S. medical students toward value-added medical education, assess their self-reported desire to participate in value-added activities, and identify potentially modifiable factors influencing their engagement. METHOD: The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of first- and second-year students at nine U.S. medical schools in 2017. Survey items measured students' attitudes toward value-added medical education (n = 7), desire to participate in value-added activities (n = 20), and factors influencing potential engagement (n = 18). RESULTS: Of 2,670 students invited to participate, 1,372 (51%) responded. Seventy-six percent (1,043/1,368) moderately or strongly agreed they should make meaningful contributions to patient care. Students' desire to participate was highest for patient care activities approximating those traditionally performed by physicians, followed by systems improvement activities and lowest for activities not typically performed by physicians. Factors increasing desire to participate included opportunities to interact with practicing physicians (1,182/1,244; 95%), patients (1,177/1,246; 95%), and residents or fellows (1,166/1,246; 94%). Factors decreasing desire to participate included making changes to the health care system (365/1,227; 30%), interacting with patients via phone or electronic communication (410/1,243; 33%), and lack of curricular time (634/1,233; 51%). CONCLUSIONS: First- and second-year medical students agree they should add value to patient care, but their desire to participate in value-added activities varies depending on the nature of the tasks. Medical schools may be able to increase students' desire to participate by enabling face-to-face interactions with patients, embedding students in health care teams, and providing dedicated curricular time.

The Time Is Now: Using Graduates' Practice Data to Drive Medical Education Reform.

Medical educators are not yet taking full advantage of the publicly available clinical practice data published by federal, state, and local governments, which can be attributed to individual physicians and evaluated in the context of where they attended medical school and residency training. Understanding how graduates fare in actual practice, both in terms of the quality of the care they provide and the clinical challenges they face, can aid educators in taking an evidence-based approach to medical education. Although in their infancy, efforts to link clinical outcomes data to educational process data hold the potential to accelerate medical education research and innovation. This approach will enable unprecedented insight into the long-term impact of each stage of medical education on graduates' future practice. More work is needed to determine best practices, but the barrier to using these public data is low, and the potential for early results is immediate. Using practice data to evaluate medical education programs can transform how the future physician workforce is trained and better align continuously learning medical education and health care systems.