The arts have unique qualities that can help create novel ways to engage learners. These novel ways of engagement can foster learners' ability to discover and create new meanings about a variety of topics, which in turn can lead to better medical practice. At each of these steps, specific actions by the teacher can enhance the potential for learners to move to the next step. The process can be enhanced when learners participate in the context of a group, and the group itself can undergo transformative change. Future work should focus on using this model to guide process design and outcome measurement in arts-based education.

OBJECTIVE Despite a recent surge in literature identifying professional identity formation (PIF) as a key process in physician development, the empiric study of PIF in medicine remains in its infancy. To gain insight about PIF, the authors examined the medical literature and that of two other helping professions.METHODS The authors conducted a scoping review and qualitative metasynthesis of PIF in medicine, nursing and counselling/psychology. For the scoping review, four databases were searched using a combination of keywords to identify empiric studies on PIF in trainees. After a two-step screening process, thematic analysis was used to conduct the metasynthesis on screened articles. RESULTSA total of 7451 titles and abstracts were screened; 92 studies were included in the scoping review. Saturation was reached in the qualitative metasynthesis after reviewing 29 articles.CONCLUSION The metasynthesis revealed three inter-related PIF themes across the helping professions: the importance of clinical experience, the role of trainees' expectations of what a helping professional is or should be, and the impact of broader professional culture and systems on PIF. Upon reflection, most striking was that only 10 of the 92 articles examined trainee's sociocultural data, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age and socioeconomic status, in a robust way and included them in their analysis and interpretation. This raises the question of whether conceptions of PIF suffer from sociocultural bias, thereby disadvantaging trainees from diverse populations and preserving the status quo of an historically white, male medical culture.Professional identity formation (PIF) in medicine focuses attention on the career-long process of becoming a clinician. 1,2 PIF can be thought of as a double helix: the individual and the profession form parallel strands that become intertwined. Each strand must bend in order to accommodate the other; however, this burden of bending and changing to accommodate seems to fall more acutely on the individual strand, with the profession's strand remaining more fixed. PIF frequently involves experimentation, change and uncertainty, and ideally results in the successful reconciliation of conflicting ideals, values and roles. Although successful formation of a professional identity has been linked to career success 3 and creativity at work, 4 a mismatch between an individual's internal bearings and the roles and expectations of the profession can create anxiety, frustration and feelings of inadequacy, and can result in the individual leaving the profession. 5 The role of culture, race, socioeconomic status and gender might be expected to be critical components of the individual strand, and could prove to be important confounders in the study of this complex process.We set out to gain an understanding of the current state of the PIF literature in medicine by conducting a scoping review and metasynthesis of the literature across three of the helping professions (medicine, nursing and counselling/ p...

These findings provide a starting point for collaborative work to positively impact clinical care and medical education through the enhanced integration of value-added medical student roles into care delivery systems.

If we are to foster critical thinking among medical students, we must reconcile the way it is defined with the manner in which clinician-educators describe critical thinking--and its absence--in action. Such a reconciliation would include consideration of clinicians' sensitivity to complexity and their inclination to exert cognitive effort, in addition to their ability to master material and process information.

The unique character of medical education in the outpatient setting has created challenges in teaching and learning that cannot be solved by the adaptation of traditional inpatient approaches. Previous work and the authors' own observational study describe a relatively passive learner focused on reporting history and physical examination data to the preceptor. Based on the work of Bordage in cognitive learning, and that of Osterman and Kottkamp on reflective practice for educators, the authors have developed a collaborative model for case presentations in the outpatient setting that links learner initiation and preceptor facilitation in an active learning conversation. This learner-centered model for case presentations to the preceptor follows a mnemonic called SNAPPS consisting of six steps: (1) Summarize briefly the history and findings; (2) Narrow the differential to two or three relevant possibilities; (3) Analyze the differential by comparing and contrasting the possibilities; (4) Probe the preceptor by asking questions about uncertainties, difficulties, or alternative approaches; (5) Plan management for the patient's medical issues; and (6) Select a case-related issue for self-directed learning. The authors conducted a pilot study of SNAPPS, introducing the model to both third-year medical students and their preceptors. Feedback was enthusiastic and underscored the importance of the paired approach. SNAPPS represents a paradigm shift in ambulatory education that engages the learner and creates a collaborative learning conversation in the context of patient care.

Medical education exists in the service of patients and communities and must continually calibrate its focus to ensure the achievement of these goals. To close gaps in U.S. health outcomes, medical education is steadily evolving to better prepare providers with the knowledge and skills to lead patient- and systems-level improvements. Systems-related competencies, including high-value care, quality improvement, population health, informatics, and systems thinking, are needed to achieve this but are often curricular islands in medical education, dependent on local context, and have lacked a unifying framework. The third pillar of medical education—health systems science (HSS)—complements the basic and clinical sciences and integrates the full range of systems-related competencies. Despite the movement toward HSS, there remains uncertainty and significant inconsistency in the application of HSS concepts and nomenclature within health care and medical education. In this Article, the authors (1) explore the historical context of several key systems-related competency areas; (2) describe HSS and highlight a schema crosswalk between HSS and systems-related national competency recommendations, accreditation standards, national and local curricula, educator recommendations, and textbooks; and (3) articulate 6 rationales for the use and integration of a broad HSS framework within medical education. These rationales include: (1) ensuring core competencies are not marginalized, (2) accounting for related and integrated competencies in curricular design, (3) providing the foundation for comprehensive assessments and evaluations, (4) providing a clear learning pathway for the undergraduate–graduate–workforce continuum, (5) facilitating a shift toward a national standard, and (6) catalyzing a new professional identity as systems citizens. Continued movement toward a cohesive framework will better align the clinical and educational missions by cultivating the next generation of systems-minded health care professionals.

With the aim of improving the health of individuals and populations, medical schools are transforming curricula to ensure physician competence encompasses health systems science (HSS), which includes population health, health policy, high-value care, interprofessional teamwork, leadership, quality improvement, and patient safety. Large-scale, meaningful integration remains limited, however, and a major challenge in HSS curricular transformation efforts relates to the receptivity and engagement of students, educators, clinicians, scientists, and health system leaders. The authors identify several widely perceived challenges to integrating HSS into medical school curricula, respond to each concern, and provide potential strategies to address these concerns, based on their experiences designing and integrating HSS curricula. They identify two broad categories of concerns: the (1) relevance and importance of learning HSS-including the perception that there is inadequate urgency for change; HSS education is too complex and should occur in later years; early students would not be able to contribute, and the roles already exist; and the science is too nascent-and (2) logistics and practicality of teaching HSS-including limited curricular time, scarcity of faculty educators with expertise, lack of support from accreditation agencies and licensing boards, and unpreparedness of evolving health care systems to partner with schools with HSS curricula. The authors recommend the initiation and continuation of discussions between educators, clinicians, basic science faculty, health system leaders, and accrediting and regulatory bodies about the goals and priorities of medical education, as well as about the need to collaborate on new methods of education to reach these goals.

These findings highlight factors associated with increasing or decreasing occurrence and time spent in bedside interprofessional collaborative care delivery. Systematic changes to census size caps, resident scheduling, and attending physician education and staffing may be required to increase the occurrence of interprofessional collaborative care.