Our simple curricular intervention led to significant short-term changes in a small number of survey items assessing students' knowledge and beliefs about LGBT persons.

Introduction Two developing forces have achieved prominence in medical education: the advent of competency-based assessments and a growing commitment to expand access to medicine for a broader range of learners with a wider array of preparation. Remediation is intended to support all learners to achieve sufficient competence. Therefore, it is timely to provide practical guidelines for remediation in medical education that clarify best practices, practices to avoid, and areas requiring further research, in order to guide work with both individual struggling learners and development of training program policies. Methods Collectively, we generated an initial list of Do’s, Don’ts, and Don’t Knows for remediation in medical education, which was then iteratively refined through discussions and additional evidence-gathering. The final guidelines were then graded for the strength of the evidence by consensus. Results We present 26 guidelines: two groupings of Do’s (systems-level interventions and recommendations for individual learners), along with short lists of Don’ts and Don’t Knows, and our interpretation of the strength of current evidence for each guideline. Conclusions Remediation is a high-stakes, highly complex process involving learners, faculty, systems, and societal factors. Our synthesis resulted in a list of guidelines that summarize the current state of educational theory and empirical evidence that can improve remediation processes at individual and institutional levels. Important unanswered questions remain; ongoing research can further improve remediation practices to ensure the appropriate support for learners, institutions, and society.

Despite some issues that still need to be resolved, the C(3) Instrument proved to be a reliable and valid tool that characterizes a medical school's hidden curriculum with respect to patient-centered care. It can be used to guide educational interventions by addressing the context that exists around formal teaching activities. It also makes possible the study of hidden curricula across multiple medical schools. Further research on the hidden curriculum should be aimed at developing a greater understanding of the dynamics between formal teaching activities and school culture.

Remediation in medical education, the process of facilitating corrections for physician trainees who are not on course to competence, predictably consumes significant institutional resources. Although remediation is a logical consequence of mandating, measuring, and reporting clinical competence, many program leaders continue to take an unstructured approach toward organizing effective, efficient plans for struggling trainees, almost all of who will become practicing physicians. The following 12 tips derive from a decade of remediation experience at each of the authors' three institutions. It is informed by the input of a group of 34 interdisciplinary North American experts assembled to contribute two books on the subject. We intend this summary to guide program leaders to build better remediation systems and emphasize that developing such systems is an important step toward enabling the transition from time-based to competency-based medical education.

No abstract

The value of continuity in medical education, particularly during clerkships, is increasingly recognized. Previous clerkship-based models have described changes that emphasize continuity in patient care, learner supervision, and curriculum. The creation of continuous student peer groups can foster interactions that enhance mutual support through uncomfortable professional transitions during the clerkship years. Here, the authors describe a third-year clerkship model based at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center called VA Longitudinal Rotations (VALOR), designed explicitly to establish a supportive learning environment for small peer groups.Seven groups of medical students (42 total) completed VALOR across three academic years between 2007 and 2009. On clerkships during VALOR, one hour per week was designated for faculty-facilitated sessions amongst peer groups. Students' perceptions of peer group support and overall program satisfaction were determined with immediate post surveys and focus groups at the end of VALOR, and with follow-up surveys 5 to 27 months after completing VALOR. Students strongly valued several elements of VALOR peer groups, including support through clerkship challenges, meeting for facilitated reflection, and appreciating patient experiences across the continuum of care. Students' appreciation for their peer group experiences persisted well after the conclusion of VALOR. VALOR students performed the same as or better than traditional clerkship students on knowledge and skill-based outcomes. The authors demonstrate that their third-year clerkship program using peer groups has built supportive learning networks and facilitated reflection, allowing students to develop critical professional skills. Student communication around patient care was also feasible and highly valued.

No abstract

IntroductionRemediating failing medical learners has traditionally been a craft activity responding to individual learner and remediator circumstances. Although there have been moves towards more systematic approaches to remediation (at least at the institutional level), these changes have tended to focus on due process and defensibility rather than on educational principles. As remediation practice evolves, there is a growing need for common theoretical and systems-based perspectives to guide this work.MethodsThis paper steps back from the practicalities of remediation practice to take a critical systems perspective on remediation in contemporary medical education. In doing so, the authors acknowledge the complex interactions between institutional, professional, and societal forces that are both facilitators of and barriers to effective remediation practices.ResultsThe authors propose a model that situates remediation within the contexts of society as a whole, the medical profession, and medical education institutions. They also outline a number of recommendations to constructively align remediation principles and practices, support a continuum of remediation practices, destigmatize remediation, and develop institutional communities of practice in remediation.DiscussionMedical educators must embrace a responsible and accountable systems-level approach to remediation if they are to meet their obligations to provide a safe and effective physician workforce.