Purpose:The electronic health record (EHR) is an important advancement in health care. It facilitates improvement of health care delivery and coordination of care, but it creates special challenges for student education. This article represents a collaborative effort of the Alliance for Clinical Education (ACE), a multidisciplinary group formed in 1992. ACE recognizes the importance of medical student participation in patient care including the ability of documentation. This article proposes guidelines that can be used by educators to establish expectations on medical student documentation in EHRs. Summary: To provide the best education for medical students in the electronic era, ACE proposes to use the Correspondence may be sent to Maya M. Hammoud, 1500E. Medical Center Drive, L4000 Von Voigtlander Women's Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. E-mail: immaya@umich.edu following as practice guidelines for medical student documentation in the EHR: (a) Students must document in the patient's chart and their notes should be reviewed for content and format, (b) students must have the opportunity to practice order entry in an EHR-in actual or simulated patient cases-prior to graduation, (c) students should be exposed to the utilization of the decision aids that typically accompany EHRs, and (d) schools must develop a set of medical student competencies related to charting in the EHR and state how they would evaluate it. This should include specific competencies to be documented at each stage, and by time of graduation. In addition, ACE recommends that accreditation bodies such as the Liaison Committee for Medical Education utilize stronger language in their educational directives standards to ensure compliance with educational principles. This will guarantee that the necessary training and resources are available to ensure that medical students have the fundamental skills for lifelong clinical practice. Conclusions: ACE recommends that medical schools develop a clear set of competencies related to student documentation in the 257 258 M. HAMMOUD ET AL.

Medical students are using electronic health records at higher rates than physicians in practice. Although this is overall reassuring, educators have to be cautious about the limitations being placed on student's documentation in electronic health records as this can potentially have consequences on their training, and they need to explore ways to maximize the benefits of electronic health records in medical education.

Our recommendations are designed to assist clerkship directors and medical school leaders overcome current challenges and ensure high-quality, community-based clinical learning opportunities for all students. They include suggesting ways to orient community clinic sites for students, explaining how students can add value to the preceptor's practice, focusing on educator skills development, recognizing preceptors who excel in their role as educators, and suggesting forms of compensation.

IntroductionThe AAMC has provided a resource to medical schools for implementing curricular change in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) health education. However, studies have identified that many health professionals who do not feel comfortable in their ability to provide quality care for LGBT patients do not perform complete sexual histories routinely and/or harbor bias towards these patients or their sexual practices. This situation underscores the continued need for further education on this topic.MethodsBased on a needs assessment survey of medical students and faculty, we developed a 1-hour didactic lecture to provide instruction on how social determinants of health impact the care of LGBT patients. Students were not required to have any prerequisite knowledge for the session. A content expert in LGBT health taught the lecture using Microsoft PowerPoint in a traditional medical school lecture hall.ResultsThe lecture was given to 180 third-year medical students. A total of 63 students (35%) responded to the retrospective pre- and postlecture survey. After the didactic lecture, students reported a statistically significant change in their knowledge of the lecture objectives.DiscussionThe didactic lecture was able to increase students' knowledge of how social determinants impact the health of LGBT patients. The lecture can be incorporated into a longitudinal curriculum on LGBT health. Additional work and research are needed on increasing comfort in faculty teaching.

Porter, Annie C.; Lypson, Monica L.; Santen, Sally A.; Christner, Jennifer G.; Grum, Cyrl M.; and Hammoud, Maya M., ,"Student evaluation of faculty physicians: gender differences in teaching evaluations." Journal of Women's Health. 25,5. 453-456. (2016 Purpose: To investigate whether there is a difference in medical student teaching evaluations for male and female clinical physician faculty. Methods:The authors examined all teaching evaluations completed by clinical students at one North American medical school in the surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, pediatrics, and internal medicine clinical rotations from 2008 to 2012. The authors focused on how students rated physician faculty on their ''overall quality of teaching'' using a 5-point response scale (1 = Poor to 5 = Excellent). Linear mixed-effects models provided estimated mean differences in evaluation outcomes by faculty gender.Results: There were 14,107 teaching evaluations of 965 physician faculty. Of these evaluations, 7688 (54%) were for male physician faculty and 6419 (46%) were for female physician faculty. Female physicians received significantly lower mean evaluation scores in all four rotations. The discrepancy was largest in the surgery rotation (males = 4.23, females = 4.01, p = 0.003). Pediatrics showed the next greatest difference (males = 4.44, females = 4.29, p = 0.009), followed by obstetrics and gynecology (males = 4.38, females = 4.26, p = 0.026), and internal medicine (males = 4.35, females = 4.27, p = 0.043). Conclusions: Female physicians received lower teaching evaluations in all four core clinical rotations. This comprehensive examination adds to the medical literature by illuminating subtle differences in evaluations based on physician gender, and provides further evidence of disparities for women in academic medicine.