What’s New and In the Queue for Academic Medicine

AM Rounds Slider Master-22

What’s New: A Preview of the April Issue
The April issue of Academic Medicine is now available! Read the entire issue online at academicmedicine.org or on your iPad using the Academic Medicine for iPad app. Highlights from the issue include:

Engaging Learners to Advance Medical Education
Burk-Rafel and colleagues, all medical students, contextualize themes discussed in a collection of learner-authored letters to the editor and conclude with recommendations to engage learners in leadership, advocacy, and scholarship. Check back throughout the month for additional content on this topic.

Creating 21st-Century Laboratories and Classrooms for Improving Population Health: A Call to Action for Academic Medical Centers
DeVoe and colleagues argue for strengthening bidirectional connections between disease-based approaches to managing health and community-based approaches to promoting health through studying social and population determinants of health.

From Communication Skills to Skillful Communication: A Longitudinal Integrated Curriculum for Critical Care Medicine Fellows
Communication with patients and families in critical care medicine (CCM) can be complex and challenging. Roze des Ordons and colleagues develop and implement a curriculum for CCM fellows at the Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, to promote the longitudinal development of skillful communication.

Bringing Rounds Back to the Patient: A One-Year Evaluation of the Chiefs’ Service Model for Inpatient Teaching
Bennett and colleagues found the Chiefs’ Service model was viewed as valuable by residents and associated with positive outcomes in terms of residents’ perceptions of learning, interdisciplinary communication, and patient care.

Do Medical Students’ Narrative Representations of “The Good Doctor” Change Over Time? Comparing Humanism Essays From a National Contest in 1999 and 2013
Rutberg and colleagues performed an analysis of essays written 14 years apart in response to the prompt, “Who is the good doctor?The findings suggest that medical students understand the “good doctor” as a relational being who especially values the doctor-patient relationship.

What’s In the Queue: A Sneak Peek
Here’s a preview of an upcoming innovation report by Cofrancesco and colleagues.

Creating an “Education Shark Tank” to Encourage and Support Educational Scholarship and Innovation
Joseph Cofrancesco Jr, MD, MPH, Scott M. Wright, MD, Eric Vohr, MA, and Roy C. Ziegelstein, MD

Abstract

Problem
Creating and supporting opportunities for innovation that showcase and reward creativity in medical and biomedical education is critically important for academic institutions, learners, and faculty.

Approach
In 2014, the Institute for Excellence in Education, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, created a small grant program called Education Shark Tank, in which two to five finalist teams present their proposals on innovative initiatives to improve education to four or five senior educator “sharks” at an educational conference, with an audience. The sharks then “grill” the presenters, considering which if any to fund, focusing on the rationale, feasibility, appropriateness of the outcome measures, evaluation and assessment plan, and proposed method of dissemination. They also make suggestions that challenge the presenters to assess and improve their designs.

Outcomes
In the program’s first year (2014), funds were divided equally between two projects, both of which were successfully completed and one of which led to a journal publication; this led to increased funding for the program in 2015. Participants have called Education Shark Tank a “challenging and rewarding experience.”

Next Steps
Education Shark Tank can facilitate educational innovation and scholarship via engaging and challenging interactions between grant applicants and reviewers in a public venue. The authors plan to conduct a 5-year survey (after 2018) of all Education Shark Tank finalists to determine the success and challenges the funded projects have had, what scholarly dissemination has occurred, if non-funded projects were able to move forward, and the value of the feedback and mentoring received.

Related Posts

Leave A Comment