SNAPPS greatly facilitates and enhances expression of diagnostic reasoning and uncertainties during case presentations to ambulatory care preceptors. Students can conduct case presentations using a technique that makes each step explicit and gives learners, rather than preceptors, the responsibility for expressing their clinical reasoning and uncertainties.

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.

In the face of a fragmented and poorly performing health care delivery system, medical education in the United States is poised for disruption. Despite broad-based recommendations to better align physician training with societal needs, adaptive change has been slow. Traditionally, medical education has focused on the basic and clinical sciences, largely removed from the newer systems sciences such as population health, policy, financing, health care delivery, and teamwork. In this article, authors examine the current state of medical education with respect to systems sciences and propose a new framework for educating physicians in adapting to and practicing in systems-based environments. Specifically, the authors propose an educational shift from a two-pillar framework to a three-pillar framework where basic, clinical, and systems sciences are interdependent. In this new three-pillar framework, students not only learn the interconnectivity in the basic, clinical, and systems sciences but also uncover relevance and meaning in their education through authentic, value-added, and patient-centered roles as navigators within the health care system. Authors describe the Systems Navigation Curriculum, currently implemented for all students at the Penn State College of Medicine, as an example of this three-pillar educational model. Simple adjustments, such as including occasional systems topics in medical curriculum, will not foster graduates prepared to practice in the 21st-century health care system. Adequate preparation requires an explicit focus on the systems sciences as a vital and equal component of physician education.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to U.S. health systems, particularly academic health centers (AHCs) that lead in providing advanced clinical care and medical education. No phase of AHC efforts is untouched by the crisis, and medical schools, prioritizing learner welfare, are in the throes of adjusting to suspended clinical activities and virtual classrooms. While health professions students are currently limited in their contributions to direct clinical care, they remain the same smart, innovative, and motivated individuals who chose a career in health care and who are passionate about contributing to the needs of people in troubled times. The groundwork for operationalizing their commitment has already been established through the identification of value-added, participatory roles that support learning and professional development in health systems science (HSS) and clinical skills. This pandemic, with rapidly expanding workforce and patient care needs, has prompted a new look at how students can contribute. At the Penn State College of Medicine, staff and student leaders formed the COVID-19 Response Team to prioritize and align student work with health system needs. Starting in mid-March 2020, the authors used qualitative methods and content analysis of data collated from several sources to identify 4 categories for student contributions: the community, the health care delivery system, the workforce, and the medical school. The authors describe a nimble coproduction process that brings together all stakeholders to facilitate work. The learning agenda for these roles maps to HSS competencies, an evolving requirement for all students. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to harness the capability of students to improve health. Other AHCs may find this operational framework useful both during the COVID-19 pandemic and as a blueprint for responding to future challenges that disrupt systems of education and health care in the United States.

To ensure physician readiness for practice and leadership in changing health systems, an emerging three-pillar framework for undergraduate medical education integrates the biomedical and clinical sciences with health systems science, which includes population health, health care policy, and interprofessional teamwork. However, the partnerships between medical schools and health systems that are commonplace today use health systems as a substrate for learning. Educators need to transform the relationship between medical schools and health systems. One opportunity is the design of authentic workplace roles for medical students to add relevance to medical education and patient care. Based on the experiences at two U.S. medical schools, the authors describe principles and strategies for meaningful medical school-health system partnerships to engage students in value-added clinical systems learning roles. In 2013, the schools began large-scale efforts to develop novel required longitudinal, authentic health systems science curricula in classrooms and workplaces for all first-year students. In designing the new medical school-health system partnerships, the authors combined two models in an intersecting manner-Kotter's change management and Kern's curriculum development steps. Mapped to this framework, they recommend strategies for building mutually beneficial medical school-health system partnerships, including developing a shared vision and strategy and identifying learning goals and objectives; empowering broad-based action and overcoming barriers in implementation; and generating short-term wins in implementation. Applying this framework can lead to value-added clinical systems learning roles for students, meaningful medical school-health system partnerships, and a generation of future physicians prepared to lead health systems change.

Medical education is increasingly recognizing the importance of the systems-based practice (SBP) competency in the emerging 21st-century U.S. health care landscape. In the wake of data documenting insufficiencies in care delivery, notably in patient safety and health care disparities, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education created the SBP competency to address gaps in health outcomes and facilitate the education of trainees to better meet the needs of patients. Despite the introduction of SBP over 20 years ago, efforts to realize its potential have been incomplete and fragmented. Several challenges exist, including difficulty in operationalizing and evaluating SBP in current clinical learning environments. This inconsistent evolution of SBP has compromised the professional development of physicians who are increasingly expected to advance systems of care and actively contribute to improving patient outcomes, patient and care team experience, and costs of care. The authors prioritize 5 areas of focus necessary to further evolve SBP: comprehensive systems-based learning content, a professional development continuum, teaching and assessment methods, clinical learning environments in which SBP is learned and practiced, and professional identity as systems citizens. Accelerating the evolution of SBP in these 5 focus areas will require health system leaders and educators to embrace complexity with a systems thinking mindset, use coproduction between sponsoring health systems and education programs, create new roles to drive alignment of system and educational goals, and use design thinking to propel improvement efforts. The evolution of SBP is essential to cultivate the next generation of collaboratively effective, systems-minded professionals and improve patient outcomes.

Evolutionary science is indispensable for understanding biological processes. Effective medical treatment must be anchored in sound biology. However, currently the insights available from evolutionary science are not adequately incorporated in either pre-medical or medical school curricula. To illuminate how evolution may be helpful in these areas, examples in which the insights of evolutionary science are already improving medical treatment and ways in which evolutionary reasoning can be practiced in the context of medicine are provided. To facilitate the learning of evolutionary principles, concepts derived from evolutionary science that medical students and professionals should understand are outlined. These concepts are designed to be authoritative and at the same time easily accessible for anyone with the general biological knowledge of a first-year medical student. Thus, we conclude that medical practice informed by evolutionary principles will be more effective and lead to better patient outcomes. Furthermore, it is argued that evolutionary medicine complements general medical training because it provides an additional means by which medical students can practice the critical thinking skills that will be important in their future practice. We argue that core concepts from evolutionary science have the potential to improve critical thinking and facilitate more effective learning in medical training.

Students can drive the content of the teaching they receive based on uncertainties they express to preceptors during case presentations. Preceptors are ready to teach at "the drop of a question" and align their teaching with the content of students' questions; these learning moments-in context and just-in-time-can be created by students.