Loading…
This event has ended. Create your own event → Check it out
This event has ended. Create your own
View analytic

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Friday, February 24
 

1:00pm

 
Saturday, February 25
 

8:00am

12:00pm

12:00pm

1:00pm

Preconference (BRIGHTON) CRIME Meeting
Saturday February 25, 2017 1:00pm - 5:00pm
BRIGHTON

1:30pm

 
Sunday, February 26
 

7:00am

(ARCHES) AMCAS for New Admission Officers
Sunday February 26, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
ARCHES

7:00am

(DEER VALLEY) AAMC Student Surveys
Sunday February 26, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
DEER VALLEY

7:00am

(SUNDANCE) Student Affairs Updates
Sunday February 26, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
SUNDANCE

7:00am

BREAKFAST (included in registration fee)
sliced seasonal fruit with berries
stawberry yogurt dip
breakfast pastries
bagels, butter, cream cheese 

Sunday February 26, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
CANYONS AND BRYCE

8:00am

Plenary Speaker Audrey Shafer
"Medical Humanities: Creativity, Community, Connection" 

Speakers
avatar for Audrey Shafer, M.D.

Audrey Shafer, M.D.

Professor of Anesthesia, Director of the Program in Arts, Humanities and Medicine, Stanford University
Audrey Shafer, MD is Professor of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine / Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System; Director, Stanford Medicine & the Muse Program, Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics; co-director, Biomedical Ethics and Medical Humanities Scholarly Concentration; and co-founder of Pegasus Physician Writers. Her courses include Creative Writing for Medical Students and... Read More →


Sunday February 26, 2017 8:00am - 9:00am
CANYONS AND BRYCE

9:15am

9:15am

(ARCHES) A "Deep Dive" into Program Evaluation
Abstract Body: Background: Ongoing evaluation of medical school programs and use of evaluation data for program improvement is required by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) to maintain accreditation in the United States. Our School of Medicine has developed a system of using evaluation data to improve curricula by conducting “deep dives” and debriefs with course directors in order to apply student feedback in an encouraging manner. When course directors are experimenting with new curricular elements, or when we identify courses with deeper or more complex refinements needs, we conduct evaluation “deep dives” by asking additional targeted questions, applying the “keep-stop-start” system, and conducting focus groups with students for additional candid feedback. The results are shared with course directors during a course debrief meeting in order to review successes and challenges, and develop a plan for improvement for the next academic year. This process allows our institution to continuously work to improve our M.D. program, while also fostering ongoing faculty development for curricular advancement. This workshop is intended for all who wish to learn and share ideas about effective evaluation strategies, and offers specific tools for ongoing curricular improvement. Objectives: At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to: 1) Explain how effective course evaluation in Undergraduate Medical Education with shared ownership between course staff, faculty and evaluators can be an effective motivator for faculty and can drive meaningful and impactful ongoing quality improvement efforts 2) Describe three different evaluation strategies and how they can be incorporated into your school’s evaluation plan 3) Discuss effective evaluation strategies for debriefing key stakeholders Methods: The workshop will be interactive and will ask participants to reflect on their own evaluation process and identify at least one strategy for advancing or improving processes at their home institution. - Introduction and evaluation history in undergraduate medical education (10mns) Activity #1: Share your role and strengths/challenges in the evaluation process at your institution (20mns) - Describe general and specific methods to address evaluation strategies, including “keep-stop-start” and deep dives (20mns) - Review the full debriefing process by which evaluation results are disseminated to and reviewed by key stakeholders, including faculty and administration (15mns) Activity #2: Identify three strategies that might apply to your institution for improving your continuous quality improvement cycle. Describe how they might be incorporated into your current evaluation process (20mns) - Summary of outcomes and closing remarks revisiting the workshop objectives (5mns) 


Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
ARCHES

9:15am

(BRIGHTON) Leading Change in Medical Education
Abstract Body: This workshop was developed over three years as part of a leadership development program at the UC San Francisco School of Medicine. In draws on multiple change management theories that have been applied to real world change initiatives in medical education. Objectives: - Define change management. - Identify initiatives that benefit from a deliberate change management process. - Describe stages of change model. - Apply a change model to a change initiative. - Analyze a case study for best practices in leading change Methods: The workshop will involve a brief overview of leading change, that includes a definition of change management, an overview of several models and details of one common model used in higher education (20 minutes). Participant activities include: - a personal reflection on change at the participant’s institution (5 minutes); - forming into Change Leadership Teams, participants will select an initiative and outline a change management plan to present to the other - - teams for feedback (25 minutes) review of a case study and participants will derive a list of best practices used in the case study (30 min) Outcomes: - Ability to explain the importance of a deliberate change leadership strategy in medical education. - Ability to outline a change strategy for a major initiative. - Be able to improve the experience of change for medical schools. Target Audience: Anyone who leads projects across the continuum of medical education. 

Speakers
avatar for Kevin H. Souza

Kevin H. Souza

Associate Dean, UC San Francisco
Kevin H. Souza serves as Associate Dean for Medical Education at the University of California, San Francisco, and was the founding director of the Office of Educational Technology (now Technology Enhanced Learning). | | He has administrative responsibility over the medical education programs and programmatic oversight of educational technology and simulation activities in the school. | | His professional interests include cultivating... Read More →



Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
BRIGHTON

9:15am

(DEER VALLEY) Case Studies in Successful Active Classroom Activities
Abstract Body: There is a lot of attention in the literature and at recent meetings about the strategies of active learning and flipped classroom teaching in medical education, but often the classroom activities receive less attention than the pre-class work. While designing the pre-class work of a flipped classroom session might feel more difficult to instructors, the active sessions are often where students feel the impact of these teaching modalities. Over recent years, UCSF School of Medicine has made a shift to use classroom time for different types of active learning instead of lectures. This has included the adoption of many techniques, with different levels of success. We have also collected detailed feedback from students and faculty on these sessions in order to continue to improve future teaching sessions. This workshop will focus on real examples of active learning and the reactions of students and faculty to the different techniques. The evaluations of these sessions are a rich resource and these “case studies” can help workshop participants build skills to design and improve their own active classroom sessions. Objectives: Describe the evidence supporting active learning as an educational strategy. Describe a range of active learning techniques for multiple teaching situations. Illustrate challenges in the implementation of active learning. Evaluate “case study” samples of active learning activities to identify areas of strength and areas for improvement. Methods: We will start with a short presentation introducing the research and evidence for bringing active learning techniques into the classroom. We will present a range of techniques from moments of active learning to intersperse in a traditional lecture to active sessions that can replace a lecture entirely. The workshop will then focus on a series of short “case studies” of active learning sessions used at UCSF School of Medicine in the past year. We will look at the design of sessions as well as student and faculty evaluations and complete an assessment of each session to identify strengths to repeat in future sessions as well as areas to improve. Intended Outcomes Audience will be able to: Define active learning Describe a range of techniques to bring active learning to different teaching formats (lecture, large group, small group, clinical teaching) Evaluate sample active teaching lessons Discuss trends and themes from student and faculty evaluations of sessions Identify areas for improvement in active learning sessions Target Audience: Faculty, faculty development professionals, course directors, administrators, instructional designers. 

Speakers
avatar for Katherine Hyland

Katherine Hyland

Professor, University of California, San Francisco
- UME, Genetics and Biochemistry | - Curriculum Development | - Faculty Development | - Active Learning/Flipped Classroom | - Peer Review of Teaching



Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

9:15am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Integrating Wellness Across the Spectrum: Medical Student to Faculty
Abstract Body: The idea of burnout as an important issue is not new, yet burnout rates continue to rise with rates estimated at 55% for U.S. physicians and 50-75% for residents. The consequences of burnout affect both the individual and the health care system, with decreased patient satisfaction, increased medical errors and higher costs. The cause of rising burnout appears to be multifactorial and includes increasing requirements for documentation, productivity pressure, work hours, perceived lack of appreciation, sense of a loss of control and/or autonomy, and organizational culture. There are many ways to programmatically address burnout, however, most fall into one of two categories - addressing individual resilience, and looking at environmental, structural or institutional support. Additionally, interventions can be focused at the individual, team, department/academic mission or system level. The needs of a particular group and the resources available will determine the scope of an intervention. Physician educators must address burnout in two spheres: that of the faculty and of the students/trainees they work with. As educators we are expected to address wellness and to prevent burnout, but how to effectively manage this task is less clear. The needs of each group vary based on many factors, including learner status, academic track and clinical setting. Programs need a framework of how to assess needs and communicate priorities to leadership. By recognizing and addressing the importance of wellness at all levels of an institution, faculty, staff, and learners can begin to focus less on burnout and more on the joys of practice. This presentation seeks to demonstrate how a program to minimize burnout and improve morale may be constructed using three case examples, Undergraduate Medical Education, Graduate Medical Education, and at a system level focusing on individual departments in a School of Medicine. Attendees will be given the opportunity share successes and develop new strategies to bring back to their home institutions. The first half of this session will discuss background/programmatic approaches. Facilitated small group discussions will further explore program needs and roadblocks. Participants will be able to: Understand the scope of burnout in health care and downstream consequences. Describe programs that have been implemented to mitigate burnout and improve morale across multiple settings. Explore tools that will allow attendees to survey the needs of constituents, identify relevant stakeholders, and outline a program to address burnout at their institution. Target Audience: faculty interested in wellness at the provider, trainee, or student level. 

Speakers
avatar for Michelle Vo, MD

Michelle Vo, MD

Director, Medical Student Wellness, University of Utah School of Medicine


Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

9:15am

(SNOWBIRD) One by One: Decreasing Failure of the Professionalism Competency, Part II
Abstract Body: Objectives: * Identify key issues around lapses in professionalism * Share specific cases examples around professionalism lapses * Discuss methods for earlier intervention around professionalism issues * Continue a regional interactive discussion about issues around professionalism in an effort to identify and remediate prior to escalation Methods: Last year at WGEA 2016, we began a discussion around failure of the professionalism competency in both the preclinical and clinical curriculum. This well-attended session made clear issues in professionalism are a concern to all of us involved in medical education. The intent of this session is to update attendees on our efforts and to invite them to share theirs. Ultimately, we would like to create a collaboration across disciplines and institutions to support proactive initiatives for promoting professionalism. 45 minute small group discussion that will include: *Introduction of the problem *Presentation of cases *Discussion of our intervention plan *Small group activity *Large group wrap up Intended Outcomes: Regional consortium around issues in professionalism with ongoing collaborative efforts at future WGEA meetings. Target Audience: All levels and disciplines of interprofessional healthcare workers. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
SNOWBIRD

9:15am

(SUNDANCE) Designing for Workplace Learning: A template to guide educators through preparation, participation and reflection
Abstract Body: Objectives (at least 3) Participants in this workshop will be able to: Define workplace learning Identify design principles for successful workplace learning experiences Use a workplace learning design template to plan the three components of workplace learning experiences: preparation, participation, and reflection Methods The session will begin with a brief, interactive presentation on workplace learning across the continuum. Presenters will use sociocultural theories of learning and work by Stephen Billett, Tim Dornan, and Sarah Yardley to explain how careful attention to the design of clinical experiences can enhance the value of workplace learning, especially for early learners. The presenter(s) will describe several design principles associated with successful workplace learning experiences, provide examples and ask participants to connect these principles to examples from their own workplaces. Participants will then receive a copy of a workplace learning design template that incorporates the design principles discussed in the presentation. They will work through an example as a large group to ensure understanding of the elements of the design template, then have time to work individually or in small groups to complete a design template for their own workplace learning environment. Participants will have an opportunity to share a draft of their plans with a partner and receive feedback. The session will conclude with a large group debrief of experiences using the template. Participants will be asked to identify key learning points from the session and one specific follow up step they will take after the session. Timeline Interactive presentation on workplace learning and design principles – 20min Share workplace learning design template and work through an example as a large group – 15min Individual or small group time to work on completing a design template – 20min Share design template with a peer and give/receive feedback – 20min Large group debrief, identification of key points and action steps – 15min Intended Outcomes Participants will complete an initial draft of a workplace learning curriculum for learners in one clinical setting. They will be able to incorporate elements of the template into workplace learning experiences in other clinical settings and share the template with colleagues. Target audience Clinician educators, Instructional designers, Faculty developers 


Sunday February 26, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

(SIDEWINDER) ERAS
Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SIDEWINDER

11:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. Creation of 4th year elective for Medical School Admissions
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM

Creation of 4th year elective for Medical School Admissions   

B.R. Chan, D. Himes, G. Kacinski, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context Medical schools have their 4th year medical students participate in a variety of ways in the admission process, but it is unknown if students understand the history of the admissions process. In 2015, at the University of Utah School of Medicine we implemented a fourth year elective that stipulates that the history of medical school admissions is also the history of medical education. Medical students receive credit by attending lectures (which are also accessible online due to residency interview travel schedules) that range from subjects such as the Flexner Report, Holistic Review, and race and ethnicity in the admissions process by reviewing historical and recent Supreme Court Cases. Students are also trained on item writing and contribute scenarios for our Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) and Situational Judgment Test (SJT) scenarios that are used for the current Class of 2021 application cycle. Objectives To measure the short-term impact of the Admissions elective we monitored how many students participated from the 4th year medical school class. We also tracked the number and quality of MMI and SJT scenarios that were created by the students each year. We were also able to monitor quiz completion (based on the Flexner Report for example). Key Message This has proven to be a popular elective as 50% of the 4th year class participates over the past 2 years, and we have received feedback that this helps them transition to internship. The medical students have also helped create over 50 MMI and SJT items that are currently used in our application process. Conclusions Additional research will be needed to ascertain lasting influence of this elective as our medical students transition into residency and attending leadership positions.  

Speakers
avatar for Benjamin  Chan, M.D., M.B.A.

Benjamin Chan, M.D., M.B.A.

Assistant Dean, Admissions, University of Utah School of Medicine



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
ARCHES

11:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Situational Judgment Test (SJT) compared to Multiple Mini Interview (MMI), Medical College Admission Test (MCAT), and Grade Point Average (GPA)
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM

Situational Judgment Test (SJT) compared to Multiple Mini Interview (MMI), Medical College Admission Test (MCAT), and Grade Point Average (GPA)  
B.R. Chan, J. Colbert-Getz, K. Pippitt, C. Knupp, M. Onofrietti, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context Medical school admissions rely on limited data to make decisions. The limitations of the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) and Grade Point Average (GPA) are apparent. Recent innovations, such as the Multiple Min Interview (MMI), have attempted to add additional information for admissions committees. However, MMI can be labor and time intensive, and there still can be variation in between evaluators on how they assess different scenarios. The next logical step is to better test non-cognitive skills, such as a Situational Judgement Test (SJT), where a standardized test is created. SJTs can inquire about different competencies, such as teamwork, professionalism, and communication skills. However, if an applicant does well on MCAT, GPA, or MMI, is there a positive correlation between SJT performance? We administered a MMI and SJT to 499 applicants to the University of Utah School of Medicine. Objectives To determine if SJT performance is correlated with MCAT, GPA, or MMI performance. We hypothesize that we are measuring different attributes and traits, such as teamwork skills, communication, professionalism that would not necessarily be detected with MCAT or GPA. Key Messages Comparing performance across MCAT, GPA, MMI, and SJT, we found that there was a positive, but low correlation (<0.30) between SJT across the domains. Thus, superior test taking (MCAT) and studying skills (GPA) and impromptu interview performance (MMI) was considered separate from SJT. This was found to be reassuring insofar that SJT appears to be assessing different domains. Conclusions Additional research will be required to longitudinally follow matriculated medical students in regards to these domains. 

California Longitudinal Evaluation of Admission Practices (CA-LEAP): Variability in Predictors of Acceptance to Medical Schools by Institution and Disadvantage Status  
E.J. Griffin, M. Henderson, C. Kelly, P. Franks, A. Jerant, UC-Davis, UC-San Diego
 Abstract Body: Introduction In 2014, deans of admissions from 5 University of California (UC) Medical Schools formed the California Longitudinal Evaluation of Admission Practices (CA-LEAP) consortium, supported by a grant from the Edward J. Stemmler Fund. Our study includes nearly 8,000 interviews from nearly 5000 individuals from three consecutive matriculation cycles (2011-20110) and includes information about applicant characteristics and demographics, interview method (MMI versus traditional), and admissions outcomes. The consortium has accumulated data from multiple institutions to longitudinally evaluate the relationships between applicant characteristics, interview and admissions practices, and performance outcomes in medical school and beyond. Research question We sought to assess the extent to which UC Medical Schools are using holistic review in the applicant selection process. To explore this question, we obtained qualitative information about interview practices from each school and analyzed the relationship between applicant demographics, disadvantage status, undergraduate metrics, and interview performance, and whether and acceptance offer was extended (yes/no). Methods Admissions and medical school performance data were collected and analyzed at UC Davis. Application and interview records were linked by a unique ID. Descriptive analyses were conducted to explore applicant characteristics and acceptance offer outcomes across the five schools. A series of multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds of receiving an acceptance offer versus not receiving an offer, as a function of applicant characteristics including gender, age, self-reported disadvantage status, undergraduate GPA and MCAT scores, and standardized interview performance score. Analyses were conducted within and across schools. Results Average undergraduate GPA and MCAT scores were similar among interviewees across the schools (range= range = 3.67-3.80). Schools interviewed equal proportions of men and women. The percentage of self-identified disadvantaged interviewees varied widely by school (15%-34%). Interview score was a significant predictor of receiving an acceptance offer at all schools (OR range=3.5-13.2). MCAT score and GPA were modestly positively predictive of an acceptance offer at 4 of 5 schools (OR range=3.5-13.2). Disadvantage status predicted offers in 3 of 5 schools. Discussion The consistent strong effect of interview score and the more modest effect GPA in predicting offers suggest that in the context of the overall admissions process, schools are being holistic both within and across institutions in that interview performance, metrics and disadvantage status all contribute to admissions decisions. The role of GPA and MCAT scores are used to screen applicants thus are understated in this study; those with low values generally do not receive an interview. Disadvantage status is associated with a greater likelihood of receiving an offer at some schools but not others, likely reflecting mission-based recruitment practices. Finally, within DA and non-DA interviewees, interview performance remains the strongest and most consistent predictor of receiving an offer, with variable influence of GPA and MCAT score. Subsequent studies will examine interview performance across schools and interview method (traditional versus MMI), relationships with pre-clinical and clinical performance in medical school. 

Speakers
avatar for Benjamin  Chan, M.D., M.B.A.

Benjamin Chan, M.D., M.B.A.

Assistant Dean, Admissions, University of Utah School of Medicine



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
ARCHES

11:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 1. Clinicians’ Perspectives on the Challenges of Standard Setting for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM

Clinicians’ Perspectives on the Challenges of Standard Setting for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)  
E.A. Hernandez, D. Kahn, E. Ha, R. Brook, C. Harris, M. Plesa, M. Lee, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Abstract Body: Introduction: All eight California schools administer an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) at the end of the third year of medical school. Although the same cases are used, each school uses a different cut off for pass/fail. The David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA decided to use the modified Angoff method for setting criterion-based standards to determine the passing score of the exam for the graduating class of 2017. Research questions: What were some of the challenges encountered by clinician educators who participated in standard setting process for the OSCE? How were these challenges overcome? What could have been done differently? Would the clinician educators use this method for other tests in the future in other settings? Methods Six clinician educators were briefed by a Professor of Education on the modified Angoff method. The method was subsequently used to determine the passing score for an eight-station OSCE administered at the end of the third year of medical school. A survey with the above four questions were sent to the six clinician educators who participated in the standard setting. Results The most common challenges clinician educators encountered were 1) determining what a minimally competent third year medical student would know (4/6), 2) scheduling a time when all clinicians could meet (3/6), and 3) not allowing clinicians’ own experience to influence their decision (2/6). Challenges to the first problem were overcome by drawing on the experience of faculty who had more experience teaching medical students (3/4). 2 out of 6 respondents thought having videos of sample target students available prior to discussion could have been helpful. All six clinicians thought they could use this in other settings they teach though all acknowledged logistical issues that would make it difficult. Discussion The OSCE administered at the end of the third year is a perfect opportunity for the medical school to assess the clinical competency of their medical students. The modified Angoff method helps set a criterion-based standard that determines borderline performance. However, the main challenge encountered by the clinician educators in this study were defining what a minimally competent student would know or perform. A better definition of minimal competency may be achieved by more extensive review of student videos. Clinicians thought they might use this method for other tests in the future. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 2. Setting standards for a high-stakes Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): Preliminary validity evidence
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM

Clinicians’ Perspectives on the Challenges of Standard Setting for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)   
E.A. Hernandez, D. Kahn, E. Ha, R. Brook, C. Harris, M. Plesa, M. Lee, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA 
Abstract Body: Introduction: All eight California schools administer an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) at the end of the third year of medical school. Although the same cases are used, each school uses a different cut off for pass/fail. The David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA decided to use the modified Angoff method for setting criterion-based standards to determine the passing score of the exam for the graduating class of 2017. Research questions: What were some of the challenges encountered by clinician educators who participated in standard setting process for the OSCE? How were these challenges overcome? What could have been done differently? Would the clinician educators use this method for other tests in the future in other settings? Methods Six clinician educators were briefed by a Professor of Education on the modified Angoff method. The method was subsequently used to determine the passing score for an eight-station OSCE administered at the end of the third year of medical school. A survey with the above four questions were sent to the six clinician educators who participated in the standard setting. Results The most common challenges clinician educators encountered were 1) determining what a minimally competent third year medical student would know (4/6), 2) scheduling a time when all clinicians could meet (3/6), and 3) not allowing clinicians’ own experience to influence their decision (2/6). Challenges to the first problem were overcome by drawing on the experience of faculty who had more experience teaching medical students (3/4). 2 out of 6 respondents thought having videos of sample target students available prior to discussion could have been helpful. All six clinicians thought they could use this in other settings they teach though all acknowledged logistical issues that would make it difficult. Discussion The OSCE administered at the end of the third year is a perfect opportunity for the medical school to assess the clinical competency of their medical students. The modified Angoff method helps set a criterion-based standard that determines borderline performance. However, the main challenge encountered by the clinician educators in this study were defining what a minimally competent student would know or perform. A better definition of minimal competency may be achieved by more extensive review of student videos. Clinicians thought they might use this method for other tests in the future. 

Speakers

Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 3. Bridging the Gap: Integrating Hypothesis-Driven Physical Exam and Clinical Reasoning for the 21st Century Physician
11:30 AM - 11:45 AM

Bridging the Gap: Integrating Hypothesis-Driven Physical Exam and Clinical Reasoning for the 21st Century Physician   

S. Narayana, H. Nye, A. Chang, J. Stein, A. Richards, A. Ishizaki, S. Cornes, Neurology, UCSF 
Abstract Body: Context: The physician physical exam (PE) is a core skill that yields data for clinical decisions. Inaccuracies, missed maneuvers and misinterpretation of physical findings contribute to medical error. PE learning taught in a “head-to-toe” manner may lack clinical context. Many experts advocate learning diagnosis-focused (“hypothesis-driven”) PE to facilitate retention and integrate clinical reasoning. The optimal instructional method for early learners in this vein has yet been determined. Objectives: Design and implement case-based standardized patient (SP) sessions in which first and second-year medical students apply history-taking and hypothesis-driven PE skills, while integrating the clinical reasoning principles of data acquisition, problem representation, and illness scripts. Key Message: With expert input, we identified 12 essential chief complaints: fatigue, weight loss, shortness of breath, ear pain, vision loss, loss of consciousness, shoulder pain, abdominal pain, falls, cognitive impairment, rash and fever. We subsequently developed seven four-hour SP sessions around these chief complaints. Each session begins with a faculty didactic on essential concepts related to the upcoming SP encounter (e.g. how to identify various cardiac sounds, how to take vital signs, how to hold the otoscope, etc). Students then obtain a focused history and complete a PE. Abnormal PE findings are simulated when appropriate. While one student is performing these clinical skills, another functions as a time-keeper and prompts her peer with possible PE maneuvers from a comprehensive checklist developed by local content area experts. Meanwhile, the third student in the room is developing an evolving problem representation and differential diagnosis as data is acquired from the history and PE. At the end of the session, students regroup with their faculty preceptor to discuss their problem representation and differential. Prior to each session, students are expected to watch skills-based videos or read content-relevant material and complete an online self-assessment as preparation. During each session, students receive focused feedback from their preceptor on their history-taking and PE technique. They also receive feedback from their SPs on communication, basic PE technique, and flow of the clinical encounter. We recruited SPs to be representative of a diverse patient population and uphold an institutional mission to promote inclusion. The evaluation plan includes: 1. Focus groups with students and faculty. 2. Observed Standardized Clinical Encounters (OSCE) performance. Conclusion: A clinical skills curriculum incorporating focused history-taking, hypothesis-driven physical exam, and clinical reasoning principles, is feasible and may address the gap of integration of previously isolated clinical skill techniques. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

(BRIGHTON) Migrating Stanford Medicine to a New Learning Management System with a Secure Test-Taking Environment
Abstract Body: Objectives This presentation will provide an overview of the project to migrate Stanford School of Medicine faculty, teaching staff, and their course materials from Sakai learning management system to Canvas. The Canvas Migration Project, which started in August 2015 (ongoing until January ‘17) has five major objectives: 1) Move all relevant course material to Canvas before the Sakai learning management system is taken offline on December 21, 2016. 2) Train interested faculty and teaching staff on Canvas features and processes. 3) Provide technical support for faculty and teaching staff during their course setup and delivery. 4) Provide current medical students a method of retrieving course materials from courses taken on the Sakai system during their time as a School of Medicine student at Stanford. 5) Provide a secure test taking environment for high-stakes exams. Methods This presentation will focus on the project management aspects of migrating over 500 courses from one learning management system to Canvas including: -The iterative planning process, -The creating and revising of communication strategies, -The execution of copying course materials, -Providing customer-service oriented faculty development and support, -Soliciting feedback from both faculty AND students, and -Piloting and implementation of Respondus LockDown Browser for secure test taking. Intended Outcomes In this small-group presentation attendees will learn one approach to managing a large scale course content migration process. We will include a brief discussion of low-cost, web-based tools used to facilitate, track and report. Surprises and lessons learned will be shared. We will conclude with time for attendees to share their experiences and ask questions. We intend for this session to be as much a conversation as a presentation. Target Audience This session is intended for both technical and academic administration interested in adopting and transitioning to a new learning management system. 

Speakers
avatar for Pauline Becker

Pauline Becker

Senior Project Manager, Stanford Medicine
Educational Technology | Curriculum Management | Classroom Technology | Project Management | Instructional Design



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
BRIGHTON

11:00am

(DEER VALLEY) Early Clinical Experiences: Are we all talking about the same thing?
Abstract Body: Objectives This small group session is intended to facilitate a conversation about the definitions and value of early clinical experiences, and develop strategies to converge student and administrator expectations for these experiences. At the end of this small group session, participants will be able to: *Explain how definitions of “Early Clinical Experience” (ECE) can vary across stakeholder groups (educational leadership, course directors, students, preceptors, clinic administrators) *Explore ways that students seek and gain what they perceive to be valuable ECE in the first year of medical school Identify expected educational outcomes from ECE *Propose methods for identifying gaps between student and administration definitions of ECE *Propose methods for identifying gaps between student and administration expectations of ECE *Consider methods for evaluating the extent to which expectations are met Methods Early Clinical Experience is a term that is both ubiquitous and loosely defined. There is a national shift toward providing clinical experience earlier in medical school, sometimes as early as the first month. In addition to doctoring courses, many schools are including a variety of required early clinical experiences in large-scale curriculum change efforts, and others provide early clinical experiences in predominantly elective experiences. We will discuss our institution’s efforts to create a common operational definition of “early clinical experience”, including sharing examples of the different experiential learning courses we developed. We will also share how we aligned stakeholder expectations to the development the current early clinical experience and suggest ways these experiences may reform in future iterations as our curriculum evolves. We will engage participants in discussion of existing gaps in defining and setting expectations for early clinical experiences, challenge the group to develop a shared operational definition, and establish the foundation for a future collaborative perspectives piece or similar scholarly work. Intended Outcomes Participants will engage in discussion of the challenges and benefits of establishing a shared operational definition of the term “early clinical experience”. By the end of the session the group will create a shared operational definition, assess how various stakeholder groups may challenge this definition, and develop strategies participants may utilize to address stakeholder concerns. Target Audience MD program faculty, staff, students 



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
DEER VALLEY

11:00am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) The Value of Teaching Guided Reflection as an Aid to Learning
Abstract Body: Introduction An established positive relationship between metacognition and learning suggests that specific training and opportunity in reflection and metacognition would be beneficial to medical students. Our research group includes academic support staff, curriculum assessment administrators and a block director/teaching faculty member. The hypothesis developed by our research group was based initially on our reading of the book, Make It Stick: The science of successful learning. From this book and other published research in medical education, we posited that teaching students to reflect on performance on a variety of assessed activities and experiences in medical school, and giving them directed feedback on the quality of their reflection, would assist in improving their academic achievement. We established the goal and construct of metacognition with Year 1 medical students during orientation activities. This included an assigned reading, classroom presentations designed to introduce the framework for guided reflective writing and the importance of metacognition in learning complex information and skills, followed by multiple writing assignments with guided prompts relevant to Year 1 assessment activities. Using a six level rubric created by medical educators specifically for evaluating reflective writing, we rated and gave feedback to students on their assignments. Ratings are not shared with the students, only directed feedback designed to encourage more in-depth reflection in the future about their learning and desired/expected level of achievement. Session Outcomes Through participation in this discussion session, participants will be able to: Identify resources for teaching medical students about the value of guided reflection; Describe an institutional approach to developing curricular activities for reflection in medical education; Understand how to evaluate reflective writing and provide directed feedback to students; Consider participating in a collaborative research opportunity to analyze the relationship between students’ ability to reflect on the development of their learning and their acquisition of required knowledge, skills and attitudes during medical school. Small Group Discussion Timeline and Methods: Introduction of Research Question and Methodology including rubric use (10 minutes) Group discussion of resources for teaching value of reflective writing (10 minutes) Examples of writing prompts used with assessment activities (10 minutes) Group discussion of measures of academic achievement across curriculum (10 minutes) Summary of future writing assignments in UME Years 1-4 (5 minutes) Invitation to collaborate on reflective writing research project (5 minutes) Reference Brown PC, Roediger HL, McDaniel MA, (2014). Make it stick: the science of successful learning. Belknap. 

Speakers
avatar for Brady Janes

Brady Janes

Director, Curriculum Development and Assessment, University of Nevada School of Medicine
avatar for Gwen Shonkwiler

Gwen Shonkwiler

Director, Evaluation and Assessment, University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine



Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

11:00am

(SNOWBIRD) Systems to Manage Accreditation 101
Abstract Body: Objectives The objectives of this small group discussion presentation are as follows: * To present an overview types of systems and reports that can help prepare a medical school for LCME-accreditation under current standards * To outline the benefits and challenges of meeting the new accreditation standards with new and legacy systems most commonly found in medical schools * To describe three examples of systems applied to address specific LCME standards and elements: - Program and learning objectives (Element 6.1, 8.2, 8.3) - Monitoring required clinical experiences (Element 6.2 and 8.6) - Depth and breadth of the curriculum (Standard 7). Methods The Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) is the body that accredits medical schools in the United States and Canada. Completion of the Data Collection Instrument (DCI) is critical to the LCME-accreditation process. The DCI requires medical schools to provide data about all aspects of their program and the LCME focus on continuous quality improvement necessitates the need for systems to drive the outcomes reported within. This session will begin with an overview of the types of systems that are used in managing a medical school including curriculum management systems, evaluation systems and reporting systems (10 minutes). The overview will be followed by a presentation of the common benefits, e.g., dashboard monitoring and central oversight, and challenges, e.g., disparate data sources and limited reporting capabilities, of responding to accreditation needs using such systems (10 minutes). The brief presentation will be followed by a small group discussion of systems and solutions at WGEA medical schools (15 minutes). Participation in the discussion will be encouraged through the use of audience response tools. Intended Outcomes Medical school deans, accreditation specialists and administrators will receive an introduction to the technical aspects of preparing for an accreditation site visit. LCME Element 1.1 is a recently established standard to reflect the need for medical schools to demonstrate continuous quality improvement. Accordingly, understanding the systems that enable compliance-monitoring has become a driving factor in the accreditation process and this small group discussion aims to contribute towards this understanding. Target Audience The intended audience is deans, accreditation specialists and administrators preparing for an accreditation site visit. 

Speakers
TD

Teresa Dean

Director, Curricular Affairs, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine
avatar for W. Wiechmann

W. Wiechmann

Emergency Medicine Physician and the Associate Dean of Instructional Technology, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine
Dr. Warren Wiechmann is and Emergency Medicine Physician and the Associate Dean of Instructional Technology at the University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine and the project leader for the school’s iMedEd Initiative, a comprehensive digital overhaul of the curriculum which uses the iPad as its centerpiece for curricular innovation. | Dr. Wiechmann’’s unique programming enabled him to enhance different facets of the medical... Read More →


Sunday February 26, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SNOWBIRD

11:45am

LUNCH (included in registration fee) & Student Video Presentation
During lunch there will be a video presentation of "Full Disclosure: Secrets of a Med Student" created by: Benz Pimsakul.  

Buffet:
arcadian field greens
chopped salad
roasted red pepper & tomato bisque
9 grain, marbled rye, sourdough breads
over roasted turkey breast
honey ham, roast beef
cheddar, swiss, provolone cheeses
lettuce, tomatoes, pickles
whole grain mustard, mayonnaise
freshly baked brownies & cookies 

Sunday February 26, 2017 11:45am - 12:45pm
CANYONS AND BRYCE

11:50am

(SNOWBIRD) Opioid Focus Group
Speakers

Sunday February 26, 2017 11:50am - 12:40pm
SNOWBIRD

11:50am

11:50am

12:45pm

(SIDEWINDER) MedEdPORTAL Focus Group
Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
SIDEWINDER

12:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Physician, Know Thyself: Reflecting on Identity and Medical Practice
12:45 PM - 1:00 PM

Physician, Know Thyself: Reflecting on Identity and Medical Practice
C. Chow, G.A. Case, University of Utah
Abstract Body: Context: As our nation’s population continues to diversify, it is important to prepare physicians to work with patients from different backgrounds. While medical education trains students to become physicians, there is less emphasis on creating self-awareness around how personal experiences inform professional practice. We developed a workshop session that provides clinicians with the opportunity to explore their social and professional identities and reflect on how their identities might influence the delivery of culturally responsive and inclusive patient care. We have presented this session to four different samples: (1) to first-year medical students during their orientation training, (2) to fourth-year medical students in an elective course, (3) to residents and fellows during a didactic session, and (4) to faculty attending a health science educators symposium. Objectives: Describe aspects of identities that matter in personal lives and professional careers Analyze how these identities are socially constructed, particularly with respect to the identities of patients Develop strategies for bridging identity differences with patients Key Message: We conducted pre- and post-surveys at the beginning and end of our workshops in order to assess our first objective: how participants perceive the intersection of personal and professional identities. We adapted an existing scale to ask participants questions about identity and belonging, and how personal identities inform professional identities. We used a two-sample t-test to assess whether there were any significant changes on these measures between the surveys. In addition, we asked an open-ended question: Thinking back over today’s session, was there any particular concept that resonated with you? Did you have an “ah-ha” moment? If so, what was it about?” Our quantitative analysis reveals that participants were more likely to agree that their social groups reflect who they are after participating in the workshop. Additionally, they were more likely to agree that their social identities are connected to their decisions to pursue medicine after completing the workshop. The open-ended question was coded for themes. 18% of respondents did not respond to this question, or said “no”. The remaining 82% of participants’ responses fall into four themes: (1) awareness of social identity; (2) awareness of professional identity; (3) recognition of professional relationships; and (4) acknowledgement of privilege and difference. Conclusion: This workshop is useful in promoting thought and reflection around social identities, professional identities, the intersection of social and professional identities, and concepts of privilege and difference. Extending this effort is a worthwhile curricular endeavor. 





Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
ARCHES

12:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. Diversity and inclusion competencies for faculty educators
1:00 PM - 1:15 PM

Diversity and inclusion competencies for faculty educators

H. Nishimura, P. O'Sullivan, A. Teherani, A. Jackson, A. Rincon, D. Davis, A. Martinez, E. Bautista, University of California San Francisco
Abstract Body: Introduction Educators have a significant impact on learner success by creating a learning environment that is inclusive of diverse students and perspectives. As we actively recruit students from diverse backgrounds, we must ensure that medical educators possess skills to effectively teach diverse learners. Based on recommendations by LCME to increase the culture of inclusiveness and results from the University of California Climate Survey, it became clear that the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) needed to improve the climate of inclusion. UCSF is well known for its success in increasing student body diversity, yet instructors still face challenges in effectively teaching and mentoring students from diverse backgrounds. We identified that the Multicontextual Model for Diverse Learning Environments (MMDLE model) was a useful framework for explaining the organizational, curricular and individual level factors that impact the campus climate and thus learners. This study sought to identify faculty educator competencies for creating an inclusive learning environment for educating diverse learners aligned with the MMDLE. Research question(s) What are competencies faculty must master to successfully teach diverse learners in a health care environment? Methods This study took a multi-step approach: 1) we conducted a scoping review of literature on teaching diverse learners for medical and health professions faculty to identify existing competencies; 2) we interviewed 12 key stakeholders; 3) we reviewed learning objectives for 7 existing diversity and inclusion curricula at UCSF targeting faculty, trainees, or staff. Lastly we clustered the objectives and mapped them to the domains of the MMDLE to ensure coverage. Results From our analysis, we developed 7 essential faculty educator competencies which were then mapped to the MMDLE. Domain 1: Instructor Identity Build foundational knowledge of key diversity concepts such as privilege, power, unconscious bias, cultural humility, microaggressions, intersectionality etc. Establish awareness of one’s own identity(ies). Develop ability to recognize, remedy and monitor conscious and unconscious bias and discrimination. Domain 2: Pedagogy and Teaching Methods Communicate effectively across racial, ethnic, gender, social other differences for learners and for patients. Develop educational skills for creating an inclusive learning environment for learners and for patients. Domain 3: Course Content Apply curriculum development skills to include diversity in course and curricular design and content. Represent and invite diverse perspectives in the structure of learning opportunities. Discussion Enabling a truly diverse and inclusive climate for learners requires faculty to be equipped with skills to teach diverse learners. This methodology for developing competencies may have implications for other academic institutions looking to enhance faculty development offerings related to diversity and inclusion in a manner that is contextually specific to the needs of the faculty, learners, and institution.


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
ARCHES

12:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 3. Outcomes and Participant Perspectives Following a UCSF-CORO Faculty Leadership Training Program
1:15 PM - 1:30 PM

Outcomes and Participant Perspectives Following a UCSF-CORO Faculty Leadership Training Program

J.Y. Tsoh, J. Cheng, A. Kuo, J. Barr, I. Merry, M. Fisch, B. Alldredge, A. Azzam, University of California San Francisco
S. Shain, L. Whitcanack, Coro Northern California
Abstract Body: Context Fostering professional development and academic advancement are critical elements for improving faculty satisfaction, success and retention. Since 2005, the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) has offered the UCSF-CORO Faculty Leadership Collaborative, a 10-session (75 program hours) leadership training program for cohorts of up to 16 faculty members. The Coro Northern California conducts the training with goals to catalyze individual and collective change to benefit both the participant and the broader UCSF community. The Collaborative has high completion rates with promising objective leadership outcomes; however, little is known about participants’ perceived values of the program, particularly longer term (>12 months) impacts after program completion. Objectives We sought to assess long-term impacts of the Collaborative from the 2005-2012 graduates' perspectives with an online survey conducted during August - October 2013. Using a mixed methods design incorporating quantitative and qualitative items, we integrated quantitative findings with emergent themes from content analyses of participant comments on open-ended questions. Key Message Between 2005–2012, 175 faculty members applied to the Collaborative: 139 (79%) were accepted of whom 136 (98%) completed the program. Graduates (64% women and 65% Whites) included faculty from schools of medicine (79%), dentistry (10%), nursing (6%), and pharmacy (5%) representing > 30 departments. The academic ranks at time of program participation included full (29%), associate (45%) and assistant (26%) professors. Since program completion, 11 (8%) graduates have obtained a UCSF leadership position as chairs or deans, of whom 9 (82%) were women. Survey respondents (N=72, response rate: 55%) included 66% women, 63% Whites, 19% Asians, 10% Blacks, and 6% Latinos. Most (92%) agreed the sponsorship of the Collaborative demonstrated the University’s commitment to foster faculty development, and indicated noticeable changes in leadership attitudes or behaviors (92%) and skills (99%). Quantitative and qualitative data revealed that graduates perceived impacts at multiple levels. At an individual level, most believed that it led to personal growth with increased self-awareness, confidence, and aspiration. The program fostered development of leadership skills in conflict resolution, team management, and giving and receiving feedback with 93% indicated an increased ability to lead in challenging times. At an interpersonal level, graduates described the program led to new collaborations. Most (90%) reported increased interpersonal leadership skills. More women than men perceived their program participation encouraged them to expand their leadership roles in professional or volunteer organizations outside of UCSF (73% vs. 48%, p=0.03). At an organizational level, some graduates described experiencing increased cohesion within departments or units. A majority (92%) said the program had increased their understanding of UCSF as an organization. More full professors agreed to the statement that the program improved the climate for UCSF than associate or assistant professors (79% vs. 45%, p=0.005). While 31% did not perceive a positive impact on recruiting or retaining faculty, the Collaborative was described as a means to provide support, connectedness, empowerment, and formal mentorship, particularly for women and minority faculty. Conclusion The UCSF-CORO Faculty Leadership Collaborative, as perceived by the program participants 12 months to 8 years after program completion, has generated positive and sustaining impacts at multiple levels, from individual to organizational. The Collaborative successfully reached a diverse faculty audience, created a faculty leadership network and led to new leadership opportunities. Although the impact on recruitment and retention are unclear, faculty are appreciative of the University’s investment in faculty development through leadership training. 

Speakers
avatar for Amin Azzam

Amin Azzam

HS Clinical Professor, UCSF
simulation, faculty development, Problem-Based Learning (PBL), and Wikipedia



Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
ARCHES

12:45pm

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 1. Progress towards mastery learning: converting foundational science assessments from partially summative to purely formative
12:45 PM - 1:00 PM

Progress towards mastery learning: converting foundational science assessments from partially summative to purely formative

L. Sells, M.M. Metzstein, T. Stocks, M. Vo, J.M. Colbert-Getz, J.E. Lindsley, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Introduction: As part of our goal to support student self-efficacy and move our culture from performance-based to mastery-based, the University of Utah School of Medicine is exploring the effects of replacing summative quizzes with formative assessments in the pre-clerkship curriculum. This change began in the fall of 2016 with one 9-week year 2 course in which the three MCQ quizzes were changed from each being worth 12% (2015) to 0% (2016) of the course grade. The final knowledge MCQ exam was changed from contributing 37% (2015) to 60% (2016), and became a must-pass element of the course grading. Using Kirkpatrick’s evaluation framework, we investigated students’ satisfaction and learning outcomes to determine the impact of this change. Research questions: Does a switch to purely formative assessments change student performance within one 9-week MS2 course? Do students perceive a change in their ability to master course content? Do students experience increased pathologic stress with more heavily weighted final exams? Methods: We compared performance on the three quizzes and final MCQ examination between MS2s in 2015 (N = 101-102) and MS2s in 2016 (N = 114-118) with Mann Whitney U tests limited to items that were similar for both years. Students’ satisfaction with the change was measured by the percentage of MS2 in 2016 agreeing with an end of course evaluation question: The formative quiz structure enhanced my mastery of course content. To determine if the change caused increased pathologic stress in students, psychological services usage data were queried. Results: There were no significant performance differences between 2015 and 2016 MS2s on quizzes 1 (76% for both classes, p = 0.546), 3 (78% for both classes, p = 0.934) and the final (83% vs. 81%, p = 0.194). On quiz 2, MS2s in 2015 did perform significantly better than MS2s in 2016, 82% vs. 78%, p = 0.011. The majority of students (75%, N = 112) reported that the formative quizzes enhanced their mastery of course content. The number of psychological sessions provided to MS2s was similar during the first four weeks (34 in 2015 and 33 in 2016) and dropped during the final 5 weeks (48 in 2015 and 18 in 2016) of the course. Discussion Switching to formative-only mid-course assessments within one integrated MS2 course did not decrease performance on two quizzes and a final and the majority of students were satisfied with the change. No evidence of increased student stress was seen. 

Speakers
avatar for Michelle Vo, MD

Michelle Vo, MD

Director, Medical Student Wellness, University of Utah School of Medicine


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
DEER VALLEY

12:45pm

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 2. Correlation between advanced thinking skills and USMLE Step One licensure exam scores.
1:00 PM - 1:15 PM

Correlation between advanced thinking skills and USMLE Step One licensure exam scores.

J. Rebman, Student, UNRMED
T.K. Baker, J. Weinert, G.S. Shonkwiler, B.J. Janes, OME, UNRMED
K.C. Facemyer, Pharmacology, UNRMED
Abstract Body: Bloom’s taxonomy (1956) is a widely used tool for describing and classifying educational objectives into cognitive domains of increasing complexity of thinking. As such, advanced thinking skills are associated with higher Bloom’s level, such as “Evaluation”, while more basic thinking skills are associated with lower Bloom’s level, such as “Knowledge”. We tested the hypothesis that higher performance of advanced thinking skills (variable one) [as described by Blooms Level 6 verbs] involved in Team Based Learning (TBL) experiences, correlates positively with higher USMLE Step 1 scores (variable two). Using Bloom’s taxonomy (1956), we rated and sorted individual Readiness Assurance Test (iRAT) questions according to the verb used in the assessment. Performance on batches of Knowledge level (Bloom’s Level 1 [B1]) questions was compared with performance on batches of Evaluation level (Bloom’s Level 6 [B6]) questions. We sorted student’s performance on B6 questions into Above Average, Average and Below Average groups. We compared (and matched and controled) their underlying aptitude (equivalent based on their entry MCAT performances) with their USMLE Step 1 performances. Using a sample of mid curriculum iRAT TBL scores, we observed that students with above average performance on B6 questions, averaged 6.00 points better than their B6 average peers, while students with below average B6 question performance, averaged 13.45 points below their B6 above average peers. The MCAT performance of these 3 groups is identical and if this is a proxy for equating individual medical school aptitude, then the difference in the performances on B6 level questions suggests that a) some educational treatment (perhaps the practices associated with TBL) facilitated this differentiation, and that b) demonstrating Above Average B6 performance is a predictor of advanced USMLE Step 1 performance. The quantitative connection between these two variables supports the hypothesis that advanced thinking skills inherent in TBL are associated with advanced USMLE Step 1 performance. 

Speakers
avatar for Timothy Baker

Timothy Baker

Associate Dean for Medical Education, University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine
avatar for Brady Janes

Brady Janes

Director, Curriculum Development and Assessment, University of Nevada School of Medicine
avatar for Gwen Shonkwiler

Gwen Shonkwiler

Director, Evaluation and Assessment, University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
DEER VALLEY

12:45pm

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 3. Development and Validation of an Inquiry Assessment Tool for the UCSF Bridges Curriculum: A Modified Delphi Study
1:15 PM - 1:30 PM

Development and Validation of an Inquiry Assessment Tool for the UCSF Bridges Curriculum: A Modified Delphi Study

S. Brondfield, C. Boscardin, G. Strewler, K. Hauer, M. Hermiston, K. Hyland, S.A. Oakes, University of California, San Francisco
Abstract Body: Introduction The new UCSF Bridges curriculum teaches an ‘inquiry habit of mind’: the process of approaching the unknown with curiosity and skepticism, challenging current concepts, and creating new knowledge. The four-year curriculum includes weekly inquiry small group cases, didactic immersions, and individualized capstone projects. To assess inquiry habit development, a tool is needed to enable faculty to monitor students’ behaviors and provide feedback. Research question We aimed to develop and validate a tool for small group facilitators to assess early medical students’ inquiry behaviors. Methods We followed established guidelines for designing an assessment tool and gathered evidence for content validity. We conducted a literature review to identify essential inquiry elements, verified findings with a UCSF expert faculty focus group, and synthesized the literature and feedback into 40 inquiry behaviors for faculty facilitators to assess. UCSF faculty educators (n=33) and final-year Health Professions Education Pathway medical students (n=14) participated in a modified Delphi survey using a Likert scale (1=absolutely do not include, 5=very important) to verify and refine the behaviors. In the second round, participants rerated each item after viewing their individual first round responses alongside the group’s mean and standard deviation data (n=31 faculty and 10 students). Inclusion threshold was a second-round median rating of 5 with 70% consensus. In three structured cognitive interviews with expert faculty educators who had not participated in the Delphi study, identified items were further refined for clarity. The authors then wrote anchors and descriptors. The tool was piloted with first-year medical student inquiry small group facilitators. Results Two-round response rate was 77% (79% faculty, 71% students). Five items met the threshold: Does the student 1) select relevant questions to pursue? 2) justify explanations with evidence? 3) critically evaluate his/her explanation in light of alternative possibilities? 4) allow for the possibility that his/her own knowledge may not be completely correct? 5) collaborate well with peers? After a pilot, the authors reviewed the data, and three small group instructors provided additional feedback; the anchors were edited with simplified descriptors. Tool implementation is ongoing. Discussion We designed and began to validate an inquiry assessment tool for early medical students. Challenges included capturing the inquiry concept while keeping the tool short, and difficulty observing complex small group behaviors for every student. Focus groups are planned to solicit feedback from facilitators and students. We hope to promote inquiry skillset acquisition by clarifying these behaviors and guiding feedback to students with this assessment tool. 

Speakers
avatar for Katherine Hyland

Katherine Hyland

Professor, University of California, San Francisco
- UME, Genetics and Biochemistry | - Curriculum Development | - Faculty Development | - Active Learning/Flipped Classroom | - Peer Review of Teaching



Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
DEER VALLEY

12:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 1. The role of third year clerkship students and the potential for change
12:45 PM - 1:00 PM

The role of third year clerkship students and the potential for change

C. Burke, D.E. Masters, P.S. O'Sullivan, L. Sheu, University of California, San Francisco
Abstract Body: Introduction Preclerkship medical education has undergone extensive reform and the clinical years are growing targets for curricular innovation. Perceptions of the third year medical student (MS3) role vary and are not standardized across clerkships or clinical sites. UCSF is implementing a new undergraduate medical curriculum emphasizing inquiry skills and systems knowledge in the preclerkship years. Understanding the perspective of clinical rotation leadership regarding the current role of MS3s may facilitate evolution and redefining of traditional MS3 roles within a novel curriculum. Research Question(s) What is the current role of the MS3? What factors influence this role? What is the potential for MS3 roles to change, particularly in the context of preclinical curricular change? Methods In this qualitative exploratory study, we interviewed current clerkship directors and site directors for eight core clerkships using semi-structured questions regarding the current MS3 role, factors contributing to the role, and the potential for changing the role in the context of curricular reform. Through an iterative consensus building process, themes relevant to the three research questions were identified. Results Twenty-three clerkship directors and site directors participated. Preliminary results reveal that the MS3 role is determined by intrinsic student-specific factors, supervisor-specific factors, and system constraints. The MS3 role is considered unique and adds value to teams through team-patient communication and inquiry tasks. The role is considered authentic and workplace learning is enhanced when the student is able to function as a “mini-resident,” assisting with patient care tasks. Directors’ positive perceptions of a novel curriculum are associated with identification of new and expanded MS3 roles, such as engagement in interdisciplinary collaboration and care transitions, or formalizing sharing of learning topics with the team; neutral or negative perceptions are associated with concerns about further systems constraints or deviation from traditional clinical skills and knowledge acquisition. Discussion The MS3 role allows students unique opportunities to engage in communication and inquiry tasks as they move towards more central and traditional team roles as “mini-residents.” While system constraints understandably limit the MS3 role, the role is inconsistent and largely determined by individual students and supervisors. Directors’ historical perspectives and reliance on tradition may hinder them from expanding the MS3 role to capitalize on new skills developed within a reformed preclinical curriculum. Thoughtful and deliberate engagement of directors is required to assist in envisioning changes to MS3 roles that utilize novel skills in training 21st century physicians. Target Audience Medical educators, medical students 



Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
SUNDANCE

12:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 2. Utilizing Technological Advances to Improve Surgery Curriculum: Experience with a Mobile Application
1:00-1:15 PM

Utilizing Technological Advances to Improve Surgery Curriculum: Experience with a Mobile Application

C.A. Green, N. Zhao, E. Kim, P. O'Sullivan, H. Chern, University of California, San Francisco
Abstract Body: Introduction: Technology provides opportunity to improve instructional approach. Previously, we published a successful home-video, basic surgical skills curriculum. Unfortunately, implementation required substantial faculty time and resources, and the approach was limited by delayed feedback and technical difficulties with cumbersome recording equipment. To address these limitations we integrated the home-video curricula with a mobile application platform. Our purpose is to describe the format of this application and learner satisfaction. Methods: This mobile application incorporates a patented pedagogical design based on Erikson’s deliberate practice and Bandura’s social learning theory. Within the platform instructors build modules focused on skill acquisition. Each module includes activities at different stages, representing a step-wise approach to learning: Challenge, Peer Review and Recap. In the Challenge phase, learners watch a video of surgical tasks completed by experts. In response, learners upload a video of themselves performing the same task. After submitting their video, learners enter the Peer Review phase where they are randomly assigned peer videos (of the same task) to review. Learners complete three peer video assessments using a grading rubric highlighting essential components for the task. After completion, learners “unlock” the final Recap stage where they receive individual feedback and can review their own videos. Using our basic surgical skills home-video curricula, we created 16 different modules with associated grading rubrics. We then invited 2 different learner groups to participate, graduating medical students and matriculating surgical residents. In addition to use of the mobile application, learners participated in 2-4 lab sessions run by surgical faculty focused on technical skills and completed a final survey about their experience with the platform. Results: In total 50 different learners submitted videos of assigned tasks and completed peer reviews. Learners testified to positive experiences specifically for the Peer Review Stage, structured home practice, ease of mobile access to submit and review videos and ongoing immediate feedback. Over half of the learners reported spending at least 10-30 minutes practicing skills before recording their videos and over 80% re-recorded at least 2 times before submission. Discussion: Based on these findings, learners appreciated the practice and peer feedback. The ability to do these steps was greatly facilitated by the electronic platform. Learners reported motivation to re-record prior to submission, indicating use of the application resulted in skill repetition. Peer feedback significantly decreased faculty resources compared to our prior implementation. Future investigation could determine the sufficiency of this platform as a stand-alone curriculum to teach surgical skills. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
SUNDANCE

12:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 3. Do Surgical Preparatory Courses Give Incoming Residents a Technical Advantage?
1:15-1:30 PM

Do Surgical Preparatory Courses Give Incoming Residents a Technical Advantage?

C.A. Green, E. Huang, N. Zhao, P. O'Sullivan, E. Kim, H. Chern, University of California, San Francisco
Abstract Body: INTRODUCTION: Graduating medical students (GMS) often participate in courses to facilitate transition from medical school to residency. For those entering surgery, curriculum frequently emphasizes technical skills. However, the sustainability and benefits of this skill acquisition once in residency remains uncertain. This study assessed technical skill performance of GMS before (T1) and after a preparatory course (T2) and then again 2 (T3) and 4 (T4) months later as surgical residents, with comparison to surgical interns without such a course. METHODS: In April 2016, 16 GMS took the surgical preparatory course. In July-August, 2016, the GMS as interns completed the basic skills curriculum for all surgical interns. Both courses included a home video curriculum with completion of the same four technical exercises at the start and conclusion of the course. Three expert surgeons scored the video exercises and we calculated average reviewers’ scores across the four tasks. Overall scores were examined for GMS across the 4 time points. Course naive (control) interns were compared to these GMS at T3 and T4. RESULTS: Seven of the 16 GMS enrolled in the preparatory course matched to our institution, and 41 residents completed the intern basic skills curriculum. Of these interns, 32 completed all pre/post course assessments (T3 and T4), and the 7 GMS-interns completed assessments at all 4 time points. Results reveal score increases for GMS from 74.5%(T1) to 94.1%(T2) (p<0.001), and maintained elevated performance in residency (89.08% (T3) and 93.02% (T4)). Control interns also improved with a course (68.2%(T3) to 82.9%(T4), p<0.001). The GMS-interns scored higher at the start of residency compared to the control interns (T3, 89.08% vs 65.03%, p<0.001), with both groups achieving near the maximum score at the end of the curriculum. DISCUSSION: This study corroborates existing evidence that preparatory courses improve performance but adds evidence that the skills are maintained upon matriculation. The study supports that our structured curriculum consistently benefits learners, but those without a preparatory course start further behind their peers, requiring a steeper learning curve. Furthermore we illustrate a potential solution for the often-feared and highly publicized “July Effect” (gap in resident skill during the first month of residency). Our GMS show technical gains that accompany them into residency, erasing the gap seen in their intern control peers. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
SUNDANCE

12:45pm

(BRIGHTON) When Students Fail to Flourish: A Method for Assessment and Intervention
Abstract Body: The session will present an approach for helping students self-identify and understand factors which contribute to the experience of academic and personal difficulty. The presentation is organized around a new self-assessment instrument we have developed which displays and describes eleven “Common Contributors to Academic and Personal Difficulty” in a visual format. These contributors are psychosocial as well as academic or cognitive. Students check factors which have some influence on, (or contribute to) their difficulty. The instrument includes an easy to use method for estimating the saliency of specified factors. The results are used to recommend specific interventions and referrals. The use of the instrument will be demonstrated with specific cases. Discussion period will invite participants to ask questions and share what they have learned from their own experiences about the topic. Objectives: 1. Demonstrate a new instrument for identifying academic, cognitive and psycho-social contributors to academic and personal difficulty 2. Discuss its applicability to faculty and other professionals who provide support to students who are struggling 3. Provide specific examples of its use with students 4. Identify four specific ways to reduce stigma and fear associated with disclosing causes for failure. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
BRIGHTON

12:45pm

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Intersecting Medical Humanities and Health Care Disparities Teaching: the power of reflective writing
Abstract Body: Objectives: Experience how a reflective writing exercise can be used in medical education. Identify ways in which reflective writing are integral part of a longitudinal health disparities curriculum. Identify findings of a reflective writing exercise on how culture of providers and patients affect patient Find at least one opportunity to include reflective writing in the participant home institution During the development of the comprehensive Health Disparities Curriculum at the University of Arizona College of Medicine-Tucson, curriculum needs were mapped and a lack of explicit and mandatory content in the clinical years was identified. To address this gap in health disparities-related content in third year, students are now assigned two reflective writing exercises – one related to cross cultural communication and the other related to social determinants of health. In the preclinical years students experience reflective writing exercises using 4 different essay prompts. For the third year requirement students identity a clinical situation they have experienced, write a short reflective essay, receive written feedback from a faculty member, and then read the essay and discuss within a small group setting. This presentation will provide participants the opportunity to experience an abbreviated version of the health disparities reflective writing exercises. The format and impact of the exercises will be described in detail, and the potential connections to resident/faculty development will also be discussed. Finally, the evaluation methodology and the highlights of the findings will be presented. The session’s participants will then have a chance to comment on this key component of the Health Disparities Curriculum, share experiences and find ways to incorporate this methodology at their home institutions. Intended Outcomes: Reflective writing exercises will be presented as a tool for exploring difficult subject matter related to health disparities in a non-threatening format. Medical students, faculty and residents understand the importance of identifying and intervening on cultural aspects and social determinants of health to improve the health of the population. A longitudinal curriculum in medical humanities and health disparities converge in the clerkship year to enhance reflective medical practice to increase patient and physician satisfaction. Target Audience: Medical school educators, graduate medical education directors and faculty, and medical education administrators. 

Speakers
avatar for Karen Spear Ellinwood

Karen Spear Ellinwood

Director, Instructional Development, University of Arizona College of Medicine
I develop curriculum for and conduct the annual residents as educators orientation, maintain the FID website (FID.medicine.arizona.edu) with original and culled resources for educators who teach medical students in clinical and non-clinical settings. Original works include a CME course providing guidance for giving constructive feedback, and a self-regulated course on formative feedback for residents as educators. In addition, I enjoy using and... Read More →


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

12:45pm

(SNOWBIRD) Opportunities to use the Curriculum Inventory for Research/Scholarship
Abstract Body: Conducting research related to curriculum content, pedagogy, structure, and competencies has been limited for years by the manner in which the research had to be conducted: surveys, literature reviews, and small studies at selected schools. While this has not prevented excellent work from being done, it has been difficult to do large scale research due survey return rates, limited literature, and the logistics for multi-institutional projects. The AAMC Curriculum Inventory has been collecting data from 85 percent of US medical schools for three years, and the 2015-2016 participation rate is 92 percent. This opens up a new opportunity for large-scale projects, and a Research Group has been convened to review the data to determine what types of research projects might be conducted, areas where additional data is necessary, and other data sources that could complement or expand CI data. That group has developed several projects that they will be conducting over the next few years. This session will provide attendees the opportunity to see an overview of the data that has been collected and to participate in discussions about individual medical school research interests and how the CI might support those interests. Objectives: At the conclusion of this session, participants will be able to: 1. Review Curriculum Inventory Data 2. Discuss medical education research projects the CI can / cannot support 3. Develop medical education research ideas 4. Collaborate with potential partners on medical education research projects Schedule: Welcome and Introduction of Presenters and Topic: 5 mins Curriculum Inventory Data Overview: 5 mins Small Group Discussion: 20 mins *Is there additional data that the CI should collect? *What types of research projects can the CI support? *What types of research projects do schools need to support their curriculum efforts? *How does your school use the CI for benchmarking, CQI, curriculum review/renewal, and accreditation? Reports Back / Large Group Discussion: 10 mins Wrap-Up / Collaboration Opportunities: 5 mins *Wrap-up includes explanation of the resources available to assist researchers such as the MERC workshops, WGEA grant, etc. Presenters: Terri Cameron, MA, Director of Curriculum Programs, AAMC Terri Cameron has been presenting and publishing about use of curriculum management systems in medical school curricula for nearly two decades. She has trained schools to use a national curriculum management system, and has worked with schools locally to help them define the criteria for system selection and for using systems effectively. She has spent the last five years designing and implementing an international curriculum benchmarking system, the AAMC Curriculum Inventory. Jorie Colbert-Getz, Phd, MS, Assistant Dean of Assessment and Evaluation, University of Utah School of Medicine Dr. Colbert-Getz has over 20 publication in medical education and has led workshops on development of research/scholarship projects. Before joining the University of Utah School of Medicine she was the Director of Assessment for Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine where she managed the Student Outcomes Research Data Warehouse, which linked all pre-matriculation, school level, and post-graduation data. She is currently the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education (SDRME) representative for the AAMC Curriculum Inventory Research Group. Arianne Teherani, PhD, University of California- San Francisco Dr. Teherani is professor of medicine in the Division of General Internal Medicine and educational researcher in the Center for Faculty Educators in the UCSF School of Medicine. Since 2007, she has served as Director for Program Evaluation, a role in which she oversees evaluation design, planning, and policy for the undergraduate curriculum in the School of Medicine. She is currently the WGEA representative for the AAMC Curriculum Inventory Research Group. 

Speakers
avatar for Terri Cameron

Terri Cameron

Director of Curriculum Programs, Association of American Medical Colleges
Terri Cameron, MA, has been leading the development of a revised national curriculum inventory at the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) since 2006. As Director of Curriculum Programs, she is responsible for developing and maintaining the Curriculum Inventory, contributing to the other Medical Academic Performance Services (MedAPS) initiatives, and building liaison relationships for MedAPS with medical schools. Prior to coming to the... Read More →


Sunday February 26, 2017 12:45pm - 1:30pm
SNOWBIRD

1:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) in undergraduate medical education (UME): How supervisors make entrustment decisions about medical students
1:45 PM - 2:00 PM

Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) in undergraduate medical education (UME): How supervisors make entrustment decisions about medical students 

C. Boscardin, K.E. Hauer, A. Teherani, Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
S. Oza, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York
P. Walstock, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen
Abstract Body: Introduction Trust is at the nexus of EPAs as an assessment tool. Work to date on EPAs in undergraduate medical education (UME) has defined and provided content validity evidence for EPAs. Little is known about how entrustment decisions are made for UME EPAs. Research Questions We investigated what levels of entrustment are typical for clinical year students at different levels, how supervisors make entrustment decisions, and how EPA ratings relate to other performance measures. Methods We implemented two institutionally-defined EPAs in the longitudinal integrated clerkships at the mid- and end-of third year (MS3) and end-of sub-internship in the fourth year (MS4). The two EPAs were: (1) Evaluate and care for a patient with an acute complaint and (2) Evaluate and care for a patient with a chronic medical problem. Supervising clinicians rated students on a 5-point scale developed by ten Cate and colleagues in which level 4 indicates the ability of the student to act independently. Results MS3s and MS4s were both predominantly rated at level 3 (may act under reactive supervision). As a group, MS4s were rated slightly higher than MS3s. The primary means by which clinical supervisors gathered information to judge students’ readiness for independent work was through direct observation of a range of activities. Although clinical supervisors saw the EPAs as representative of the activities students’ partake in, some felt that ratings of entrustment were less relevant, particularly in the third-year, when students would not be able to achieve independence. We found low to moderate correlations between EPA scores and overall ratings by clerkship directors and comprehensive standardized patient examination scores for both MS3s and MS4s. All students scored between 3 (good) and 4 (outstanding) on clerkship director ratings, and no scores below 3 were recorded. In contrast, supervisors used the full 5-point EPA scale, resulting in greater performance differentiation across learners. Discussion MS3s and MS4s are trusted to complete an activity with supervision readily available upon request. Supervisors’ reliance on direct observation indicates that EPAs may help facilitate high quality assessment. EPAs might be used to diversify the information on which to base consequential summative decisions. Our recommendations for how EPAs can be structured to improve judgments of trust include focus on scale use, EPA details, and faculty development. Advancing the conversation on EPAs entails inquiry into how trust forms across the continuum of medical school education starting in early clinical education.  


Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
ARCHES

1:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. The importance of faculty development in implementing assessments aligned with EPAs
2:00 PM - 2:15 PM

The importance of faculty development in implementing assessments aligned with EPAs

S. Stern, K. Miller, J. Wold, K. Anderson, T. Glasgow, G. Zinkhan, D. Roussel, S. Lamb, J. Colbert-Getz, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context A critical aspect to ensure that medical students achieve milestones in a competency-based framework is developing faculty members’ understanding of the Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs). However, it is unknown how much faculty development is needed before faculty can be entrusted to accurately assess medical students. In 2013 the University of Utah School of Medicine implemented a two-year clinical method curriculum (CMC) using the EPA framework to develop goals and assessments. Learning communities of 10 students/faculty member are used to deliver the curriculum to each cohort of 100-120 students. Objectives 1. To describe faculty development for learning community faculty who rate medical students on assessments aligned with EPAs. 2. To identify barriers, as reported by learning community faculty, in faculty development relating to EPAs Key Message Learning community faculty received the following EPA faculty development: Two brief presentations of EPAs by CMC course directors in lecture with students and faculty present; presentation and discussion of EPAs at the annual faculty retreat; annual “just-in-time” instruction prior to completing EPA progress forms for students; and post-hoc faculty development discussions after completing EPA progress forms. Barriers to EPA faculty development reported by core faculty members were: variability of faculty knowledge about how EPAs are used and assessed in other aspects of medical training (i.e. GME specific EPAs); the length of the EPA-based assessments and applicability to student level of training; and the level of detail associated with each EPA that faculty are expected to assess. Conclusion Little research exists on the amount and type of faculty development necessary for rating students using assessments developed with the EPA framework. Next steps are to survey learning community faculty on their post training knowledge of EPAs and their confidence in assessing students, and to evaluate the quality of feedback provided to students through the EPA-based assessments. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
ARCHES

1:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 3. How much explicit curriculum do students need about EPAs?
2:15 PM - 2:30 PM

How much explicit curriculum do students need about EPAs?

J. Wold, K. Miller, S. Stern, K. Anderson, T. Glasgow, G. Zinkhan, D. Roussel, S. Lamb, J. Colbert-Getz, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context As medical schools adopt the Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) as a framework for curriculum development and assessment it is important to consider students’ knowledge about this framework. Recent research has focused on faculty use of EPA-based assessment of students, but little or no attention is given to another important stakeholder in the process - the students. If students are expected to meet milestones and eventually be deemed “entrusted” then it is important to know how much explicit curriculum is needed about the EPAs. In 2013 the University of Utah School of Medicine implemented a two-year clinical method curriculum (CMC) using the EPA framework to develop goals and assessments. Learning communities of 10 students/faculty member are used to deliver the curriculum to each cohort of 100-120 students. Objectives To describe the explicit curriculum to students on EPAs during a two-year clinical method curriculum Key Message The explicit curricular elements to students about EPAs were: Introduction to the EPAs during CMC orientation; CMC course syllabi goals and objectives notated with specific EPAs; presentation and discussion of EPA’s prior to students completing self-assessments; “Where we have been and where were are going” discussions related to the EPAs; detailed description of EPA components in the self-assessment tool students complete biannually; one-on-one student meetings with learning community faculty to discuss portions of the EPA-based self-assessment; and citation of the AAMC EPA blueprint made available to students. Conclusion The more knowledgeable students are about EPAs, the more focused and invested they may be in achieving entrustment. Further study as to which components are most effective and the depth to which students should understand the EPAs is necessary. Our next step is to determine if students’ construct effective individual learning goals focused on EPA milestone development once they have received the explicit EPA curriculum. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
ARCHES

1:45pm

POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE [Oral Presentation] Full-time basic science educators: a “gold-standard” for medical student academic support
Full-time basic science educators: a “gold-standard” for medical student academic support 
S.D. Schneid, K. Brandl, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences & School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego (UCSD)
A. Apperson, N. Laiken, Office of Educational Support Services, University of California, San Diego (UCSD) School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context Academic support programs are meant to enhance student learning and promote successful progression through a challenging medical curriculum. While many medical school academic support programs offer tutoring services for their students, the majority of tutors are medical students or graduate students1. Without the presence of full-time experienced professional educators dedicated to being the most current on the content and providing significant accessibility to students, tutoring services will be less than optimal. And as students with multiple acceptances make their final decision about where to attend medical school, the quality of academic support available may have significant implications for optimal recruitment of applicants. Objectives The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) School of Medicine (SOM) created the Office of Educational Support Services (OESS) to provide comprehensive academic assistance in the basic sciences. Uniquely, the OESS is staffed by four full-time educators. As part of their job training, OESS educators were expected to attend all medical school lectures and become content experts in a broad range of basic science disciplines so they could maximally help medical students learn this content. On a weekly basis, they provide approximately ten hours of “drop-in” office hours and three hours of review sessions available to the entire class. The remainder of their available time is filled meeting with students individually during a course and during the summer for those requiring remediation. Because the OESS educators are full-time employees and are involved with multiple courses throughout curriculum, they are able to establish long-term and meaningful interactions with the medical students. All academic assistance provided by the OESS is done collaboratively with the course directors and faculty advisors, and has the full support of the SOM administration. Key Message The AAMC collects student satisfaction data from medical school graduates annually using the Medical School Graduation Questionnaire (Likert scale rating: 1 = not at all satisfied and 5 = very satisfied). From 2014-2016, UCSD medical students (n=220) reported a high level of satisfaction with tutoring provided by UCSD SOM. The average at UCSD SOM was 4.5 compared to 3.9 for all other medical schools (p<0.0001). In fact, 67% (SD = 3.0%) of UCSD medical students reported being very satisfied compared to 34% (SD = 0.6%) of students from the other 136 US medical schools (n=16,756). Also, in 2015, 126 first-year UCSD medical students were solicited to fill out a survey regarding OESS. Eighty-two students responded and of the 48 students who reported receiving multiple medical school acceptances, 52% reported that the presence of OESS influenced their decision to attend UCSD. Conclusion Making a long-term investment in the training of full-time basic science educators has built a unique and robust academic support service that provides a high level of medical student satisfaction that is nearly double that of other US medical schools (67% versus 34% being very satisfied). Furthermore, the presence of a strong academic support program can play an important role when a student is deciding which medical school to attend. References 1. Saks, NS, Karl S. Academic Services in U.S. and Canadian Medical Schools. Med Educ Online 9:6. Available from http://med-ed-online.net/index.php/meo/article/view/4348  


Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

1:45pm

(BRIGHTON) Let’s Talk About it: Facilitating Discussions with Medical Students on Implicit Bias
Abstract Body: Summary: Unconscious biases are prejudices we have but are unaware of. These are “mental shortcuts” based on social norms and stereotypes. (Guynn, 2015). Considerable evidence demonstrates that we all have unconscious bias; even if we sincerely believe that we are being fair and objective, stereotypes may still be influencing our opinions—without us being aware of it. Studies that have measured implicit attitudes have shown that MDs have a stronger implicit preference for White Americans over Blank Americans when compared to the general public and other professional degree holders that can contribute to racial health care disparities (Sabin, 2012). Being aware of one’s own biases can help improve one’s ability to care for patients from diverse backgrounds and be more culturally sensitive however acknowledging and discussing one’s biases can be uncomfortable. Objectives Describe four educational approaches of teaching medical students about implicit bias Discuss the role that faculty and the institution plays to address bias. Recognize the power of self-reflection as a method for understanding bias Share best practices and resources for addressing bias. Methods Four institutions will share their different educational approaches to address this topic with their students at their respective institutions and the challenges and lessons learned. Introductions (5m) Faculty from each institution will give a brief presentation on their curriculum (15 min) Discussion on the delivery of implicit bias curriculum (25 min) Intended Outcomes Participants will gain a variety of ideas of how to deliver curriculum for medical students on implicit bias Target Audience Faculty and staff responsible for curriculum development and medical students. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
BRIGHTON

1:45pm

(DEER VALLEY) Rethinking Diversity at One Medical School: Narrowing the Focus to Increase Impact
Abstract Body: At the University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine, we recognize the importance of increasing the diversity of our institution, but are faced with limited resources for recruitment and pipeline programs. Consequently, our leadership decided to strategically focus recruitment efforts for a targeted approach to diversity, with the intention of enhancing quality and impact. To do this, we utilized an inclusive systematic, data-driven process to re-evaluate and re-define the institution’s diversity. We enlisted support from our main campus partners from the Center for Student Cultural Diversity to provide a deeper context surrounding diversity recruitment and retention. This process aligned our diversity efforts with the mission of the school to strategically focus on groups for which we can demonstrate a commitment through policies, procedures, resources, and outcomes. This presentation will describe: 1) how to redefine an institution’s diversity categories to guide recruitment and retention activities, 2) the results of our assessment, and 3) how to use results to implement change. Two methods were utilized to obtain input regarding our recruitment strategies: focus groups and a survey. Focus groups were used to promote open discussion about diversity and inclusion at our institution and how diversity efforts can be both narrowed and improved to further advance our school’s mission. To preserve the transparency of the discussion, our external partners from the Center for Student Cultural Diversity led our focus groups. For broader participation, an online survey was utilized to acquire data representative of the school of medicine community. The survey asked respondents to rate how effective the school has been in creating a diverse and inclusive environment, how diversity efforts can be improved, and then asked respondents to identify 3-5 groups that our school should focus on for recruitment. The survey was emailed to all students, faculty, residents, and classified staff. Overall 35 people participated in the focus groups and 400 responded to the survey, for a response rate of 33.5%. There was clear consensus from the focus groups and survey in terms of how the school should strategically focus diversity efforts. In addition, the focus groups and survey provided rich data on why particular groups should be the focus, as well as suggestions for how diversity and inclusion can be improved. These results will be discussed, along with an overview of how these data are informing subsequent diversity and inclusion efforts and how this process can be used at other institutions. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
DEER VALLEY

1:45pm

(SIDEWINDER) Guiding Incoming MD Students to Data Security Compliance: A Gateway to Medical Professionalism
Abstract Body: Objectives After this session attendees will be able to: * Understand the requirements of data security policy at Stanford Medicine. * Describe how Stanford Medicine attains 100% compliance with data security policy among incoming students prior to the start of classes. * Discuss strategies that other schools have taken with regards to setting and enforcing data security policy. Methods Information security is a critical priority for Stanford Medicine. As of May 31, 2015, Stanford University policy states that all Stanford-owned computers and devices must be verifiably encrypted. This also applies to personally-owned computers and devices which either may store or access High-Risk Data (including Protected Health Information (PHI)) or which are used on the Stanford network. Since it is assumed that incoming MD students will access PHI during their learning, all MD students must be fully compliant with this policy before starting classes. This requirement is viewed as a gateway to critical discussions on medical professionalism. Every year Stanford Medicine matriculates approximately 90 students to our incoming class. Students receive their admissions packet containing matriculation instructions and the acceptance letter between November and March. In early July, they begin receiving communications directly from the administration with further details about the requirements for their upcoming matriculation. One of these requirements is compliance with Stanford data security policy. Stanford has implemented a set of systems to track and report on compliance. If a student is not compliant before the deadline they will be barred from class, they will not have access to their course materials online, and they will not have security access to student facilities (lounge, gym, study rooms). Once the initial communication is sent out, every week until orientation week, students are sent individualized reminders until they reach compliance. On orientation week, they receive daily reminders. IT support is available to students over the phone, at an on-campus Tech Bar and at one-on-one support sessions scheduled during orientation week. As a result of these efforts, we have not once had to enforce the consequences of non-compliance. Intended Outcomes In this session we will present Stanford Medicine’s policy, process and results. But we intend for this session to be more of a conversation than a presentation. We want to hear from the attendees how data security has been addressed at their institutions and what are the common barriers, pitfalls, and factors for success. Let’s learn from each other! Target Audience Office of Student Affairs, Privacy Office, IT staff and leadership, Admissions, Students 

Speakers
avatar for Pauline Becker

Pauline Becker

Senior Project Manager, Stanford Medicine
Educational Technology | Curriculum Management | Classroom Technology | Project Management | Instructional Design



Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
SIDEWINDER

1:45pm

(SNOWBIRD) Interprofessional Education Hotspotting Immersions: a Community-based Approach for Addressing Health and Health Care Utilization
Abstract Body: Objectives 1. Describe Hotspotting as a method for intervening with patients who have highly complex needs. 2. Consider approaches for using Values-driven Outcomes Data to identify individuals who may benefit from a Hotspotting intervention. 3. Identify appropriate educational outcomes for interprofessional education (IPE) teams participating in an IPE Hotspotting Immersion. 4. Describe the processes and challenges of creating and implementing IPE Hotspotting teams. 5. Discuss the benefits of successful Hotspotting for patients, health professions students and health care delivery systems. Methods This project uses Interprofessional Education Hotspotting Immersions to drive IPE beyond the focus of direct care and to foster the development of Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice (IPEC) within the framework of systems-based practice. Hotspotting is the term used to describe local team-based interventions designed to improve health and health care utilization for individuals and communities with highly complex needs. A team of interprofessional faculty (medicine, social work, nursing, and pharmacy) will present the process, structure and early outcomes of creating and implementing an IPE Hotspotting Immersion with chronically and persistently homeless individuals supported in a Housing First program. Presentation content will include: the use of value-driven health systems data to identify patients, preparing students with a Hotspotting curriculum, navigating legal consent and HIPAA requirements, and working with community organizations. Guided discussion with the audience will be enhanced by the participation of student members from the IPE Hotspotting team. Intended Outcomes Participants will learn about an innovative community-based model for IPE that provides students with opportunities to collaboratively identify and address the drivers of health while seeking to reduce unnecessary health care costs and utilization. Participants will be able to identify the benefits, challenges, and first steps for implementing a similar IPE Hotspotting program within their own educational institutions. Target Audience The target audience for this Small Group Discussion includes: IPE faculty and health professions program directors interested in community-based IPE and academic health centers leaders exploring Hotspotting interventions in their own communities. 

Speakers
avatar for Sara Hart

Sara Hart

Associate Professor, Director of Student and Community Engagement, Unviersity of Utah



Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
SNOWBIRD

1:45pm

(SUNDANCE) Fostering Creative and Critical Thinking Within the Context of Medical Student Research
Abstract Body: Objectives Session participants will: - Learn about the instructional methods used in an innovative Creative and Critical Thinking course for medical students conducting summer research. - Experience two creativity and critical thinking exercises used in the course. - Learn approaches other participants use to enhance students’ abilities to think creatively and critically. Methods Presentation – 15 minutes We will present the goals, instructional methods, and assignments used for a Creative and Critical Thinking course. This 1-credit elective is designed to stimulate the development of creative and critical thinking skills within the context of diabetes, cardiovascular, and eye disease research (the foci of three NIH T-35 training grants). In the course, students learn and practice (a) techniques that facilitate identification of potential areas for research and development of research questions, and (b) observational, curiosity-building and innovative thinking skills. The course objectives are aligned with the following competencies from the University of Utah School of Medicine (UUSOM) undergraduate medical curriculum: - Commit to excellence and scholarship. - Develop the curiosity to seek out research and advancements which impact the field of medicine. - Actively engage in self-directed learning activities that promote lifelong learning. - Exhibit interpersonal and communication skills that promote effective information exchange with professional associates. This course is required of all UUSOM students engaged in research between MS1 and MS2 who have received NIH T-35 grants or who are enrolled in the MD/PhD program. Creativity and Critical Thinking Exercises – 10 minutes Participants will be introduced to and practice two exercises used in the course: Observation and curiosity-building exercises: Notice and record at least three curious or never-before-noticed things in your life. Reframing research questions: Historical examples and an exercise on how reframing a research question from an alternative perspective can lead to discovering the “truth.” Small group discussion – 15 minutes Participants will discuss methods they are using to foster creative and critical thinking and/or ways they might integrate the aspects of the course content at their institution. Whole-group report-out – 5 minutes A representative will be asked to report the most interesting and/or key points from each group’s discussion. Intended Outcomes Session participants will learn methods the session presenters are using to build students’ abilities to engage in creative and critical thinking. They also will be stimulated to think about ways they can incorporate creative and critical thinking skill building in the curriculum at their institution. Target Audience Curriculum developers, faculty who oversee scholarly concentration (research) programs 

Speakers
LS

L.A. Stark

University of Utah - GSLC


Sunday February 26, 2017 1:45pm - 2:30pm
SUNDANCE

2:45pm

(SIDEWINDER) AMCAS Updates
Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
SIDEWINDER

2:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Intended and Emergent Learning in Interprofessional Scenario-Based Simulation
2:45 PM - 3:00 PM

Intended and Emergent Learning in Interprofessional Scenario-Based Simulation

B.C. OBrien, M. Wamsley, J. Rivera, UCSF
Abstract Body: Introduction: Interprofessional (IP) scenario-based simulations are designed to support participants’ learning with, about, and from one another. Educators’ make decisions about scenario content, participants, and materials based on intended learning objectives. However, even highly-structured scenarios leave room for interpretation by participants, which can yield unanticipated, or emergent, learning. Examining emergent learning in scenario-based simulations may provide insights that can enhance their design. Research question(s): What learning opportunities emerge during an IP scenario-based simulation? How do they relate to the intended learning? Methods: We qualitatively analyzed 9 videos from an IP standardized patient simulation of a 70 year-old woman who recently fell, has multiple chronic conditions and a complex medication regimen. We used interaction analysis techniques to document how medical, NP, pharmacy, physical therapy, and dental students worked in teams of four to distribute and coordinate tasks and perspectives during the 15 minute pre-visit huddle portion of the simulation. Using intended and emergent learning as an analytic lens, we focused on the relationship between specific design features (e.g., instructions given to students, sequence of the scenario, and learning objectives) and students’ interactions during the scenario. Results: The pre-visit huddle gives students time to read the case, discuss roles and tasks, and decide the order in which they will each interview the patient for 12 minutes. By design, the huddle provides an opportunity for students to learn about one another’s expertise and coordinate efforts to optimize patient care. Some groups took up this learning opportunity by having each member describe their concerns and suggested approach, then trying to decide a logical order. Other groups focused more on the details of the case, trying to develop a shared understanding of content such as medications or disease processes. In these groups, participants had few opportunities to practice coordinating and negotiating tasks and roles. Several groups struggled to decide a logical order. Behaviors potentially contributing to this struggle included: no acknowledgement of overlapping roles, reluctance to take responsibility for tasks several team members could perform, and framing the circumstances as unrealistic. These behaviors created emergent learning opportunities that appeared to diverge from intended learning. Discussion: Literature on formal, informal, and hidden curricula has raised awareness of differences between stated objectives and actual practices across learning environments. Our findings add to this work by highlighting ways in which students actively construct, and thereby contribute to, learning opportunities in a simulated environment that is designed for IP learning. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
ARCHES

2:45pm

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. Teaching Intensive Care Medicine from the Learners’ Perspective: A Multicenter Evaluation
3:00 PM - 3:15 PM

Teaching Intensive Care Medicine from the Learners’ Perspective: A Multicenter Evaluation

L. Santhosh, UCSF Medical Center
W.G. Carlos, Indiana University
A. Brady, University of Washington
M. Sharp, Johns Hopkins University
 Abstract Body: INTRODUCTION/RESEARCH QUESTION: It is important for teaching physicians to know what qualities are most valued by learners. To date, only two studies have been published addressing internal medicine residents’ perceptions of teaching faculty [1,2]. We sought to expand on the evidence about this topic through a multicenter study at four geographically diverse academic medical centers. Our study focused on teaching characteristics of intensive care unit (ICU) physicians that learners perceive are most impactful. METHODS: The study was conducted at Indiana University, Johns Hopkins University, UCSF, and University of Washington. Internal medicine residents completed an anonymous online survey rating the importance of characteristics of ICU attending role models. Questions on our 37-item-questionnaire were derived from prior studies and from the Stanford Faculty Development Center for Medical Teachers Clinician Teaching program [1,2,3]. Learners also named impactful role models at their institutions. T-tests were used to compare scores. RESULTS: 260 residents responded to the survey. The attributes most commonly rated as “very important” to trainees were that the attending enjoyed teaching house staff, demonstrated empathy and compassion to patients and families, explained clinical reasoning & differential diagnoses, treated non-MD staff members respectfully, and showed enthusiasm on rounds. Factors that trainees rated as less important were having numerous research publications, having served as a chief resident, sharing personal life with house staff, and organizing end-of-rotation social events. DISCUSSION Our study provides new information to teaching faculty striving to impact their learners’ education. While prior data demonstrated that learners valued attendings having served as a chief resident and sharing personal information with house staff, our study did not replicate this. We confirmed that learners appreciated teachers who are perceived to enjoy teaching. We also discovered that expression of empathy, explanation of clinical reasoning, and qualities of professionalism were influential. This may reflect a new generation of learners, differences between ICU versus ward teaching, or institutional variations. Next steps include analyzing course evaluations of named attending role models and conducting thematic analysis to identify predictors of teaching excellence. REFERENCES: Wright, S., et al. "Attributes of excellent attending-physician role models." New England Journal of Medicine (1998). Wright, S. "Examining what residents look for in their role models." Academic Medicine (1996). Skeff, K., et al. "The Stanford faculty development program: a dissemination approach to faculty development for medical teachers." Teaching and Learning in Medicine. (1992). 



Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
ARCHES

2:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 1. The GME program conundrum: A grounded theory of valued characteristics Multicenter Evaluation
2:45 PM - 3:00 PM

The GME program conundrum: A grounded theory of valued characteristics Multicenter Evaluation

G.F. Martinez, K.S. Knox, K. Spear-Ellinwood, K. Moynahan, C. Clemens, University of Arizona
Abstract Body: Introduction Hoekzema et al. state that Graduate Medical Education (GME) program quality is an ill-defined construct with no widely-agreed upon metrics. Yet, directors are required to complete reports regarding the quality of their programs. Previous studies explore residency director and resident perceptions and propose metrics to assess quality. Traditional metrics include: board pass rate, in-training exams, and accreditation status while others look at graduate trajectories, clinical performance measures or a combination of all. Little is known about what values inform the definition of program quality to other educational leaders. Research Question The purpose of our study is to learn how program quality is defined by a broader scope of educational leaders not included in previous studies. We ask: what metrics are valued that inform leaders about the quality of our GME programs that may be under recognized nationally? Methods In our IRB exempt study, we applied the inductive methodology of Grounded Theory to categorize concepts and formulate a hypothesis. In-depth hour long individual and focus group interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim between August 2015 and May 2016. Participants included department chairs, vice chairs for education, residency directors and associate directors interviews (N =17) from five large clinical departments at the University of Arizona College of Medicine-Tucson. Constant comparison analysis was conducted. Results Overall, there was a belief that programs are only as good as the caliber of their residents, teaching faculty, curricular structure relative to departmental training missions. Valued metrics included: ratio of primary care or subspecialty career aspirations to actual matriculation achieved, percentage of residents presenting scholarly projects at national conferences, rate of clinical or educational research productivity of teaching faculty, degree of research opportunities, trainee diversity, percentage going into academic positions versus community practice, and faculty turnover impact. Differences in the perceived value in retaining students and residents into fellowships and faculty positions as a quality indicator emerged. Some assigned high value to the “pipeline” theme or hiring those they trained while others valued graduates leaving to prestigious academic institutions more. U.S. News & World Report and Doximity residency rankings were perceived as not valuable as criteria and methodologies were seen as irrelevant or flawed. We theorize that the above outcomes measured against specific department missions best indicates quality for those in our study. Discussion Knowing desired mission outcomes of departments is important to contextualizing quality and should be considered in annual reviews and self-studies. 

Speakers
avatar for Karen Spear Ellinwood

Karen Spear Ellinwood

Director, Instructional Development, University of Arizona College of Medicine
I develop curriculum for and conduct the annual residents as educators orientation, maintain the FID website (FID.medicine.arizona.edu) with original and culled resources for educators who teach medical students in clinical and non-clinical settings. Original works include a CME course providing guidance for giving constructive feedback, and a self-regulated course on formative feedback for residents as educators. In addition, I enjoy using and... Read More →
avatar for Lu Martinez

Lu Martinez

Assistant Dean, Faculty Affairs and Development, University of Arizona College of Medicine Phoenix
Faculty Development- medical education and educational research | Qualitative Research methods | All things GME



Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
SUNDANCE

2:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 2. Efficacy of asynchronous teaching (flipped classroom) model in point-of-care ultrasound for medical students and first year emergency medicine residents: A pilot study
3:00 PM - 3:15 PM

Efficacy of asynchronous teaching (flipped classroom) model in point-of-care ultrasound for medical students and first year emergency medicine residents: A pilot study

P. Aguilera, B. Lara, F. Vargas, D. Sanchez, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, CHILE
M. Lee, V. Sigalov, A. Chiem, University of California, Los Angeles
Abstract Body: Introduction The use of Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) in medical education has grown during the last ten years. Ultrasound in undergraduate medical education has gained increasing popularity. One of the difficulties faced for its implementation is the time needed to teach practical skills and image acquisition by faculty members and also to translate it to clinical relevant information. We utilized a flipped classroom model to train novices in POCUS. Research Questions How effective is the flipped classroom model in teaching POCUS to medical trainees? Methods: We recruited eight volunteer emergency medicine PGY1 and seven last year medical students that completed an emergency medicine clerkship. The participants’ baseline knowledge and image acquisition skills for E-FAST ( extended focused assesment sonography in trauma), lung, IVC ( inferior vena cava) and basic cardiac ultrasound (ECHO) were evaluated by a test (written and online) consisting of 15 questions and cases and a standardized hands-on exam according to American College of Emergency Physician imaging guidelines (9 items, scored from 1 to 5, with 5 being the best score). After baseline evaluation, participants received a flipped classroom intervention consisting of 80 minutes online videos covering imaging acquisition techniques and normal/abnormal ultrasound findings recognition. Then they received a 90-minute hands-on training with ultrasound certified experts. Their performance and subjective evaluation of the intervention were assessed a week after the intervention. Data analysis was conducted using Wilcoxon matched-pair test. Results: Fifteen participants completed all pre- and post-tests. Their image acquisition skills improved from 20 to 33 points out of 45 maximum score (p<0.05). 13 of the 15 subjects improved in the knowledge assessment portion by at least one point, which did not reach statistical significance (p=0.5). Discussion Basic ECHO and E FAST POCUS teaching of medical students and EM interns is feasible. Asynchronous learning is a good mechanism to teach and learn image interpretation. Image acquisition, however, requires more hands-on training to acquire good images. The trainees seem to have good ultrasound baseline knowledge. The content coverage and difficulty level of the pre-test on knowledge may be increased to better detect trainees deficiency. This cohort will be followed to assess retention capacity 60 days after. This pilot study will serve as a baseline for future research in POCUS teaching. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
SUNDANCE

2:45pm

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 3. Inclusion of a formal pediatric curriculum in an adult rheumatology fellowship training program for application in areas underserved by pediatric rheumatologists
3:15 PM - 3:30 PM

Inclusion of a formal pediatric curriculum in an adult rheumatology fellowship training program for application in areas underserved by pediatric rheumatologists

S. Stern, A. Woodward, A. Hersh, A. Sawitzke, D. Lebiedz-Odrobina, University of Utah
 Abstract Body: Context There is a critical shortage of pediatric rheumatologists in the Intermountain West and in other geographic regions across the United States as there are states without a full-time pediatric rheumatologist (ID, WY, MT) and others with severely limited access to pediatric rheumatology care. The current number of fellows being trained in pediatric rheumatology is unlikely to meet this need. Therefore, adult rheumatologists are frequently asked to evaluate pediatric patients’ care with limited training in pediatric rheumatology, pediatrics, or transition medicine. Given the substantial differences between pediatric and adult rheumatology practices, this has the potential to lead to significant delays in care. In July 2016, the University of Utah School of Medicine Rheumatology Division implemented a curriculum involving a 10% compulsory pediatric rheumatology experience to address this need. Objective To describe a curriculum for adult rheumatology fellowship that focuses on enhancing pediatric rheumatology knowledge. Key Message The adult and pediatric rheumatology divisions at the University of Utah collaborated to develop a 10% pediatric rheumatology curriculum which is incorporated into the general adult rheumatology fellowship training program. During the pediatric rheumatology rotation, fellows participate in inpatient and outpatient rheumatology care, manage phone calls from pediatric patients and their families, triage pediatric rheumatology phone consults, attend lectures in pediatric rheumatology, and present at pediatric rheumatology journal clubs focusing on gaps in pediatric rheumatology knowledge and transition care. This collaboration has strengthened the bond between the rheumatology and pediatric rheumatology divisions and enabled increased knowledge sharing. Barriers to the implementation of this program have been lack of knowledge of pediatrics among internal medicine trained rheumatology fellows, the addition of another hospital system with its own electronic health record, and uncertainty of the impact this program will have on increasing access to pediatric rheumatology expertise in geographic areas lacking a pediatric rheumatologist. Conclusion This is an innovative curriculum that incorporates a 10% pediatric rheumatology experience in an adult rheumatology fellowship training program. There is a lack of research to inform the education of internal medicine trained rheumatology fellows in pediatric rheumatology. The next step is to assess the comfort and knowledge base gained in pediatric rheumatology by the rheumatology fellows and to evaluate how this program impacts the fellows’ future clinical practice. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
SUNDANCE

2:45pm

(BRIGHTON) Translating Value Improvement into Educational Reform Across the Continuum
Abstract Body: We propose a small group session to discuss tactics toward integrating value-driven healthcare concepts and practice into education at the UME and GME levels. The objectives of this session are to (1) briefly examine the definition of “value” and the importance of integrating trainees into value improvement processes, (2) discuss our efforts at the University of Utah at the UME level through curriculum development, and (3) discuss efforts at the GME level through the creation of a value committee. After discussing efforts at our institution, we will then (4) transition to a discussion about experiences at other institutions. We will introduce the concept of “value” as it pertains to healthcare and discuss how it has been defined both nationally and locally here at the University of Utah. We will discuss why it is vital that medical professionals are trained in this domain both in light of the ACGME Next Accreditation System as well as practice in the community at large. We will stress the importance of coordination between departments and the health care institution in developing an integrated educational program. UME-level efforts to build a curriculum in value-driven healthcare will then be discussed. We will describe the approach to education transformation using Kotter’s 8 steps to transform organizations as a conceptual framework. We will identify key stakeholders who have been recruited to contribute to the process of curriculum development and highlight the intentional overlap between the UME and GME efforts. To emphasize the importance of institutional alignment, we will highlight our approach to identifying and incorporating specific terminology and methodology unique to the University of Utah. GME-level efforts to create a GME Value Committee will then be discussed. We will describe our initial efforts at member recruitment, emphasizing the importance of representation from both GME and health system operations and leadership. We will discuss integration of the University of Utah-specific value methodology and value summary into our work. We will discuss the role of the committee and how it has evolved over time, addressing challenges we have encountered and our progress to date. We will then answer questions, invite comments and facilitate discussion. Session attendees will leave with new knowledge and ideas about how to approach the integration of value-driven healthcare into UME and GME education at their own institution. 



Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
BRIGHTON

2:45pm

(DEER VALLEY) First-Generation Mentorship Program for Graduate Students: Transitioning for Success
Abstract Body: Stanford has a history of supporting the undergraduate education of first-generation and low-income students. Services were recently extended to first-generation graduate students in the medical school who can face similar issues (feelings of isolation, Imposter Syndrome, do not fit into the School’s culture). During this small group discussion, the presenters will describe the genesis of the Stanford Medicine First Generation Mentorship program, outcomes of its first year, and engage session participants about their schools’ strategies to support first-generation medical and biosciences students. Learning Objectives Identify characteristics of first-generation students that are unique to the medical student population Describe Stanford Medicine’s program and recruitment and assignment process of students and mentors Discuss the benefits and challenges of formalizing a mentorship program for first-generation graduate students Consider approaches and strategies used by other schools to support first-generation medical students Methods This small group discussion will focus on determining the programmatic needs of first-generation graduate students and fostering collaborations with other offices to support staffing and funding of programs. The session will begin with a brief 15-minute presentation describing the first-generation community at Stanford and the mentorship program During the next 20-minute interactive block, small groups of participants will work through case scenarios to assess students’ needs, identify existing school resources, determine opportunities for programming directed at first-generation students, and brainstorm considerations for mentor recruitment and engagement The session will close with a 10-minute large group debriefing of the case scenarios and discussion of strategies employed at other schools to support first-generation medical students Intended Outcomes Describe characteristics of first-generation graduate students that affect their academic performance and adjustment to the culture of medicine Identify strategies for utilizing existing resources and partnering with other offices to support programming (Including learning how other schools support first-generation medical students) Target Audience Evaluation results from the pilot year demonstrate that Stanford Medicines’ students have an increased sense of belonging and encouragement as a result of participating in the first-generation mentoring program. Our target audience includes faculty or staff members with a stake in medical student success including members of student affairs, academic advising, wellness, admissions, alumni associations, and pipeline programs. 

Speakers
avatar for Mijiza M. Sanchez, MPA, EdD

Mijiza M. Sanchez, MPA, EdD

Associate Dean of Medical Student Affairs, Stanford Medicine


Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
DEER VALLEY

2:45pm

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Professionalism is a Many-Splendored Thing
Abstract Body: Objectives 1. Appraise professionalism as a dynamic, contingent process that incorporates attitudes, beliefs, and concepts, thus resistant to a static or universal definition. 2. Determine the skills and values that could define professionalism at the learner’s institution. 3. Create educational interventions and extracurricular activities that address the desired skills and values. Methods The presenters will discuss the limitations of working with a static definition of professionalism and offer examples of creating an adaptable definition for a given set of circumstances. We will also present guidelines for creating new educational interventions and extracurricular activities and for adapting existing ones. In the discussion portion, we will encourage participants to brainstorm skills and values that could apply to a definition of professionalism for their home institutions. To facilitate brainstorming, we will collate and categorize these ideas using sticky notes filled out by participants, in an interactive technique borrowed from Hoshin Kanri planning theory, and discuss what we learn. Intended Outcomes Both of the presenters are faculty who are tasked directly with teaching professionalism to undergraduate medical students. A primary difficulty in any cohort or institution is agreeing on a definition of professionalism, so that aspects of it may be addressed in the classroom or extracurricularly. We argue that working toward a static definition is not possible or productive, and instead, professionalism should be regarded as a mutable set of skills and values that depends on the given circumstances. We would like learners to leave our workshop with the confidence to teach professionalism as constantly changing, experiential, and participatory. They will also leave our workshop with concrete tools for applying the ideas we explore. Target Audience This workshop will be salient to teaching faculty and administrators with direct student contact. The discussion will also be targeted to students and trainees, who are potentially the most effective at setting standards for professionalism in a given medical culture. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

2:45pm

(SNOWBIRD) Launching a Complex, Integrated Curriculum: Lessons Learned from the UCSF Bridges Curriculum Staff Team
Abstract Body: Objectives: In August 2016, the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine launched the Bridges Curriculum. This novel approach to medical education prepares future physicians to address 21st-century challenges by leading health systems change in safety, quality, and patient satisfaction, and developing skills and knowledge in systems improvement, implementation science, data management, and interprofessional teamwork. The four integrated elements of the curriculum include: 1) the Clinical Microsystems Clerkship (CMC) where students participate in a longitudinal immersion in clinical teams with a focus on developing direct patient care skills and engaging in institution-lead quality improvement efforts; 2) the Core Inquiry Curriculum (CIC), which gives students an opportunity to explore current, complex, and cutting-edge scientific or healthcare problems; 3) Foundational Sciences (FS), in which students come to understand and apply traditional basic sciences to the 21st-century practice of medicine; and 4) Assessment, Reflection, Coaching, Health (ARCH) Weeks, which focus on students understanding their competency development through holistically reviewing and reflecting on their performance. New learning strategies include: - Use of flipped classroom - Frequent low-stakes assessments - Physician coaches to support student learning in the clinical environment - Dedicated weeks for integrated assessment, reflection on competency development, learning planning, and attention to one’s well-being. - Adapted PBL learning format to explore the edge of known science - Criteria for assessing the “Inquiry Habit of Mind” At the end of the discussion, participants will be able to: - Describe the design and implementation of the Bridges Curriculum - Describe how integrated elements create a novel approach to medical student learning - Assess the benefits of coaches and assessment weeks - Describe how to make strategic choices for launching a complex curriculum - Identify lessons learned from the implementation of the new curriculum Methods: The session will begin with an overview of Bridges, structure of the first year, and the innovative elements (25 minutes). The presentation will include four members of the staff implementation team, each of whom will describe an element with regard to design, faculty involvement, and staff involvement. Participants in this session will receive a worksheet with a description of the elements. After the presentation, the facilitator will solicit questions from participants and the members of the implementation team will offer their insights (20 min). Intended Outcomes: As a result of attending, individuals will have insight into developing and implementing novel elements into a medical school curriculum. Target Audience: Those considering or implementing curricular change. 


Sunday February 26, 2017 2:45pm - 3:30pm
SNOWBIRD

3:45pm

5:00pm

Poster Session

The size of the poster boards stands are 4’x 8’.  



Sunday February 26, 2017 5:00pm - 6:45pm
CANYONS LOBBY AND SOUTH LOBBY
 
Monday, February 27
 

7:00am

(ARCHES) CRIME Business Meeting
Monday February 27, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
ARCHES

7:00am

(BRIGHTON) WGEA Business Meeting
Monday February 27, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
BRIGHTON

7:00am

7:00am

(SUNDANCE) WGSA Business Meeting
Monday February 27, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
SUNDANCE

7:00am

BREAKFAST (included in registration fee)
whole wheat bagels
cream cheese
plain yogurt dip
granola & berries  

Monday February 27, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
CANYONS AND BRYCE

8:15am

8:15am

(ARCHES) MESRE Workshop: Evaluation of Educational Innovations

The focus of this session is to provide participants time to practice using a logic model to select educational outcomes and processes, and to explore theories or rationales linking program processes to outcomes. As a process-oriented program evaluation approach, the logic model can illuminate change processes and the context in which the educational innovation is embedded. Using case studies of educational innovations provided by the presenters, workshop participants will select program outcomes and processes that could be used to explore how the case study innovation “works”.

Learning Objectives:
• Utilizing a logic model, select program outcomes for their own innovations that will be valued by key stakeholders.
• Describe program processes that are likely to contribute to the selected outcomes.
• Describe a “theory-in-action” or rationale for how program processes lead to program outcomes.
• Identify features within the context in which the innovation is implemented that are likely to impact or generalize program outcomes.

Speakers: Christy Boscardin, PhD & Anne Vo, PhD

Facilitators: Cha Chi Fung, PhD




Monday February 27, 2017 8:15am - 9:45am
ARCHES

8:15am

(BRIGHTON) A New Instructional Design Mindset for Medical Education
Abstract Body: As educators, we are asked to manage constant change as we deliver top notch education. The university context has changed in many ways and this frequently involves working in areas outside our expertise. One of the biggest areas of change involves leveraging technology and media in learning, and now suddenly, long term experts in science, medicine and education may feel unprepared to move forward in a new technology enhanced curriculum. UCSF faced this challenge starting four years ago as we worked to transform our curriculum into the new UCSF Bridges curriculum. Our old mindsets and strategies to design technology enhanced instruction were holding us back. In this session, we present a new instructional design mindset to provide a framework for non-technologists to use when leveraging technology to enhance the curriculum. Objectives Describe current challenges and goals at medical schools leveraging technology in the curriculum Describe a new Instructional Design Mindset to enable non-technologists to create effective learning that uses technology Describe educational outcomes when using this new mindset Apply this new Instructional Design mindset at your institution Session Methods: 1. Slide presentation using the UCSF Bridges curriculum as an example of some of the challenges facing medical schools and outcomes 2. Presentation describing a New Instructional Design Mindset 3. Hands-on activities: Independently: participants complete a short self-reflection describing their current instructional design mindset In small groups: discuss this new mindset for themselves and their teams. A New Instructional Design Mindset: 1. Passion for teaching and learning - willingness to explore teaching & learning in any form, with technology or without, engaged in how people learn 2. Human Centered Design – using design principles that start with the learner, Design Thinking, and User Experience (UX) 3. Informal Coaching and Mentoring - involves empathy for others, informal teaching that goes back and forth where each person teaches skills and mindsets while working together 4. Team play - team management and communications, leading and following others to produce results as a team 5. Creativity – curiosity, asking “what if?” - exploring and connecting innovations 6. Project management –managing the details on our projects and others Intended Outcomes: Participants will be able to describe this new instructional design mindset and take it back to their schools to develop themselves, teams and for engaging instructional design experts. Intended Audience course directors, instructors, instructional designers, technologists, administrators 

Speakers

Monday February 27, 2017 8:15am - 9:45am
BRIGHTON

8:15am

(DEER VALLEY) Culinary Medicine: Teaching nutrition in an inter-professional hands on setting
Abstract Body: Medical school nutrition curricula have struggled to provide the needed skills for counseling and assisting patients with health behavior change, despite a strong societal need for guidance in this area. Culinary Medicine is a unique approach to helping physicians improve the lives of their patients, while also impacting their own wellness, by providing participants practical knowledge that can be applied in their own lives. In 2016 the University of Utah developed a collaborative culinary medicine program with the School of Medicine (SOM) and the College of Health (COH) using the Goldring Center for Culinary Medicine at Tulane University curriculum as a foundation. This course, initially offered only to medical students as an elective, was co-taught by faculty from the SOM and COH. Nutrition graduate students served as teaching assistants in order to provide an inter-professional experience. To enhance exposure to other disciplines, future offerings will be cross-listed in the Colleges of Nursing, Health and Pharmacy. This workshop will cover the basics of developing and implementing an interactive inter-professional nutrition curriculum (30 min) followed by a hands-on Culinary Medicine experience (60 min). Medical students who have participated in our course will serve as assistants during this session, helping participants prepare a number of healthful snacks as they share their experiences in the course. Workshop participants will be able to: Define culinary medicine and describe the role it can play in training students and residents to assess patients’ habits and provide assistance in lifestyle modification Identify strategies for implementation of culinary medicine curriculum into health sciences education Articulate the role of culinary medicine in the personal wellness of health care providers Describe solutions to common challenges experienced during implementation Target Audience: faculty or students interested in Inter-professional education, practical integration of basic science content with clinical care and/or those who enjoy fresh, healthful food 


Monday February 27, 2017 8:15am - 9:45am
DEER VALLEY

8:15am

(SNOWBIRD) From Words to Action: A Core Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) “Toolkit” to Foster Successful Implementation of the Core EPAs in MD Programs
Abstract Body: This session highlights the use of a recently introduced EPA-specific Toolkit designed by the 10 AAMC Core EPA pilot institutions. We introduce 13, one-page templates that have been designed to simplify use of EPAs for assessment and teaching purposes in medical education, facilitate faculty and resident development, and support entrustment committees in decision-making. This work represents efforts of the Core EPA Pilot members to share the EPAs in a format that can be readily adopted and implemented in unique institutional contexts. It builds on the initial conception of EPAs by the AAMC, as published in the Curriculum Developers’ and Learners’ guides (2014). Description of Issue/topic and Rationale: In 2014, the AAMC published a Curriculum Developers Guide, as well as a Learner’s Guide, to introduce the Core Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for Entering Residency to medical educators and learners. Since then, 10 pilot institutions have developed an EPA Toolkit to assist in successful implementation of a Core EPA curriculum. The purpose of this workshop will be to introduce the EPA Toolkit and explore its use in each attendee’s institution. In the toolkit, each EPA is represented by a one-page schematic that presents the major behavioral tasks or skills of the EPA with three stages of learner development. The schematic also includes one level of “unacceptable” behaviors that would need to be addressed before a learner can progress along a developmental trajectory toward entrustment decisions for patient care. Our goal is to share each of the 13 EPA one-page templates and illustrate how institutions might use these for learner assessment, teaching in preclinical and clinical settings, faculty and resident development, and entrustment decision-making in an interactive, participant-engaged session that builds upon attendee perspectives and experiences. Learning Objectives: By the end of this workshop, attendees will be able to: 1. Describe key elements of the Core EPA toolkits 2. Provide examples of how the toolkits can be used for learner education and assessment, faculty development, and entrustment decision-making 3. Discuss opportunities for EPA implementation within unique institutional contexts Methods and Session Plan: 10 minutes: Introduction of Speakers, EPA-specific “toolkits” and Purpose of the Session. 10 minutes: Setting the task, and forming groups. Attendees will be divided into four groups according to their preferred interests: (1) assessment, (2) direct teaching, (3) faculty and resident development, (4) entrustment decision-making. Prepared Toolkit packets will be distributed. 30 minutes: Groups work on assigned task and enter comments into a shared Google Doc form. Each group will choose a subset of the 13 Core EPAs and review the “one-pager” EPA summaries designed by the Core EPA Pilot Project members. They will consider their EPAs from the perspective of their group (see above) and focus on opportunities and challenges posed by the construct. They will have 25 minutes to discuss how they could use the template within their unique institutional contexts, and another 5 minutes to enter brief 4-5 word responses summarizing the discussion into a shared Google document. 40 minutes: At the 50-60 minute point of the session, the whole group will re-convene, and we will use the remaining 40 minutes to review EPA comments in the Google Doc about possible implementation strategies. These will be organized in categories to facilitate and abbreviate the discussion: implementation for assessment, teaching (preclinical and clinical), faculty/resident development, and entrustment decision-making. Intended Outcomes: Participants will have an increased understanding of the Core EPAs and have access to the Toolkits to implement them at their home institutions. Target Audience: anyone interested in implementing the AAMC Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency into their medical school curricuulm. 



Monday February 27, 2017 8:15am - 9:45am
SNOWBIRD

8:15am

(SUNDANCE) Becoming the Riddler - Principles in writing effective multiple-choice questions
Abstract Body: Learning Objectives Identify principles in creating effective MCQ’s. Analyze sample MCQ’s as being effective or less effective. Create MCQ’s using the principles learned during this workshop. Assess effectiveness of created questions. Methods Medical students study what they are tested on. If they are tested on minute facts and basic recall questions, they will study facts and basic recall information. Even if problem-solving activities are conducted in the classroom it has been our experience that most students will limit their studying to memorizing minute facts if that is how they are tested. However, if a test requires problem-solving skills, students will focus their studying in problem solving because students rise to the level of the assessment. To put another way, the end goal in learning a new language is not to learn countless pages of vocabulary words and verbs (even though that happens). The end goal is to speak the language conversationally. Similarly, the end goal in learning any of the disciplines in medical school is not to learn countless pages of information and procedures (even though that happens). The end goal is to apply that information in problem solving and real life situations. Multiple-choice questions that assess students at a higher cognitive level of understanding (based upon Bloom’s taxonomy) require an understanding of basic principles of assessment creation. Activities and Schedules: The workshop is outlined as follows: Principles. Presentation of principles in constructing high-quality MCQs Application. Display of a variety of MCQ's with group discussion on their effectiveness. Practice. Attendees write their own MCQ’s in small groups followed by large group discussion. Other assessments. At the end of the session other assessment methods will be discussed showing how the principles can be applied to other forms of assessment other than MCQ's. Expected outcomes. This session is aimed at helping attendees improve their assessments in whatever discipline they are involved. 

Speakers
avatar for David Morton

David Morton

Professor, University of Utah School of Medicine
Gross Anatomy | Curriculum committee


Monday February 27, 2017 8:15am - 9:45am
SUNDANCE

10:00am

10:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Is there an “Honors” level of competency or is it time to retire the “H” grade in clerkships?
10:00 AM - 10:15 AM

Is there an “Honors” level of competency or is it time to retire the “H” grade in clerkships? 

J. Colbert-Getz, M. Northrup, D. Roussel, A. Smith, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Purpose: With more and more medical school using the Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) as a framework for competency it is unclear if grading systems beyond pass/fail are necessary. However, a pass/fail clerkship grading system is in conflict with residency program selection, which place great emphasis on “honors” in a program specific clerkship (1). The main purpose of this study was to determine if faculty and residents who evaluate clerkship students conceptualize competency for “honors” as a norm-referenced standard or a criterion-referenced standard. It is important to understand how raters conceptualize honors because norm-referenced standards are not typical in a competency-based framework. The secondary purpose was to characterize the domains in which honors students stand out from non-honors students as perceived by faculty and resident raters. Approach/Methods In 2015-2016 the University of Utah School of Medicine required Critical Care Clerkship included a question on an EPA-aligned global rating form: Does this student perform at an honors level; if so, what distinguishes the student from a non-honors student? Two raters independently coded all qualitative responses (1) by any reference to criterion- or norm-referenced judgment for determining honors and (2) by EPA or non-EPA areas based on grounded theory for the later categorization. Any disagreement was discussed till consensus was reached between the raters. Results/Outcomes: There were 99 global rating forms completed on 81 students. Fifty-six of the forms indicated honors level performance and of those 20% described students’ performance in terms of norm-referenced judgments while the other 80% were based on criterion-referenced judgments. The top five topics mentioned for students with honors were work ethic (mentioned on 25% of 56 forms), patient-centered care (21%), teamwork or EPA 9 (21%), active learning (18%) and knowledge (16%). Discussion: When raters form a judgment about the honors student they are most likely to do so in a criterion-referenced manner. However, with the exception of teamwork, what distinguishes an honors student from a non-honors student is not necessarily captured in the EPAs. Significance Assessments aligned with EPAs may be useful for determining entrustment decisions, but may not accurately capture the honors clerkship student as conceptualized by faculty and resident raters. More large-scale research is needed before it can be determined if the honors grade is warranted in a competency based framework. References 1. National Resident Match Program. Results of the 2016 NRMP Program Director Survey. June 2016. Available online: http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NRMP-2016-Program-Director-Survey.pdf 

Speakers
avatar for Danielle Roussel

Danielle Roussel

Assistant Dean for Clinical Curriculum, University of Utah


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
ARCHES

10:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. Clinical Skills Temporal Degradation Assessment in Undergraduate Medical Education
10:15 AM - 10:30 AM

Clinical Skills Temporal Degradation Assessment in Undergraduate Medical Education

J. Fisher, R. Viscussi, A. Ratesic, C. Johnstone, R. Kelley, J. Bates, E. Situ-Lacasse, W. Adams Rappaport, R. Amini, University of Arizona College of Medicine
Abstract Body: Abstract: Objectives: Medical students’ ability to learn clinical procedures and competently apply their skills on patients is an essential component of medical education. Complex skills with limited opportunity for practice have been shown to degrade without continued refresher training. To our knowledge there is no evidence that objectively evaluates temporal degradation of clinical skills in undergraduate medical education. The objective of this study was to evaluate temporal retention of clinical skills among third year medical students. Methods: A cross-sectional study at an urban academic medical center evaluated 45 novice third year medical students for temporal retention of pigtail thoracostomy, femoral line placement, and endotracheal intubation skills. Prior to the start of third-year medical clerkships, medical students participated in a two-hour didactic session geared to teach clinically relevant procedures. Prior to their respective surgery clerkships students were asked to perform the same three procedures and were evaluated by trained emergency medicine and surgery faculty for retention rates using three validated checklists. Results: Retention rates were shown to rapidly decline between six and 12 weeks with statistical significance (p < 0.05) for all three procedural skills. Conclusion: Further data needs to be collected in a variety of clinical skills to determine set points for implementing refresher training. 


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
ARCHES

10:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 3. Relationship between Propensity to Trust and Entrustment-based Clinical Evaluations
10:30 AM - 10:45 AM

Relationship between Propensity to Trust and Entrustment-based Clinical Evaluations 

M.B. Farmer, University of Colorado
J. Shea, C.J. Dine, J. Lapin, J.R. Kogan, University of Pennsylvania
Abstract Body: Introduction: Trust is an increasingly recognized construct in medical education both for its role in clinical education and its utility in evaluation. The decision to trust a trainee with less supervision can be used as an indicator of competency. For example, entrustable professional activities are increasingly being used to assess ACGME competencies and milestones. Given the central role of trust, it is important to understand the factors that affect entrustment decisions. The field of personality psychology has long recognized trust as an element of personality, noting some people are generally more trusting than others. To best achieve the goal of measuring the trainee’s competency, it is important to elucidate and alleviate supervisor-dependent factors (sources of error). Research Question: To determine if there is a relationship between clinical supervisors’ natural propensity to trust (personality trait) and their entrustment-based evaluations of trainees. Methods: 196 internal medicine attendings at the University of Pennsylvania were invited to participate. Propensity to trust was measured using the Trust facet of the NEO Personality Inventory-3 Big Five personality survey; the Ideas facet was used as control trait. Each facet contained 8 statements rated on a 5-point scale (Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree). Participants were emailed the questionnaire; three reminders were sent to non-responders. Results were correlated with attendings’ previously completed entrustment-based clinical competency evaluations of internal medicine interns (PGY1) and residents (PGY2/3). This study was IRB approved. Results: 137 attending physicians participated (70%). Of these, 118 (60%) had sufficient evaluation data (> 6 evaluations each of interns and residents) for analysis. No correlation existed between either personality trait (Trust and Ideas) and participants’ ratings of trainees using an entrustment-based evaluation scale [for trust: r = -0.010, p = 0.913; r = 0.009, p = 0.927; for ideas: r = 0.026, p = 0.780; r = 0.060, p = 0.517, for evaluations of PGY1s and PGY2-3s, respectively]. Discussion: Trust as a personality trait does not seem to measurably effect how attendings complete entrustment based evaluations suggesting trainee trustworthiness (competence) may be a key determinant of trust in longitudinal clinical relationships. Propensity to trust may be most important in novel situations, diminishing as information is gained about the trustworthiness of the individual being trusted. Propensity to trust may be less important for grounded, summative entrustment decisions, such as those formal clinical evaluations intend to measure. Generalizability of findings is limited given the single institution study of internal medicine attendings. 


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
ARCHES

10:00am

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 1. Novel Approaches to Predictive Modeling for Understanding Influences of Practice Behavior: An Example Using Alzheimer’s Disease
10:00 AM - 10:15 AM

Novel Approaches to Predictive Modeling for Understanding Influences of Practice Behavior: An Example Using Alzheimer’s Disease

J. Reiter, J. Perez, S. Tordoff, W. Faler, CME Outfitters
Abstract Body: Introduction. An essential component of improving patient outcomes through medical education is ensuring healthcare providers (HCPs) perform according to best practices. Traditional statistical comparisons of pre- versus post-activity performance are important for demonstrating performance improvement. However, they do not provide information regarding the factors that influence practice behaviors, which will help guide needs assessments for future activities and ensure the appropriate topics, formats, questions, and audiences are targeted. PredictCME utilizes a form of predictive modeling known as CHAID (chi-square automatic interaction detection). Although frequently used in data mining, CHAID has not been utilized in medical education. PredictCME can be used to determine which variables most impact knowledge, competence, behavior, or other endpoints. It has two main advantages over linear or logistic regression: 1) decision tree-based output which allows for a more informative and user-friendly interpretation, and 2) ability to utilize both continuous and categorical data. This presentation provides results from a CHAID analysis of real-world data from an educational activity on Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Research Question. What factors influence practice behaviors in HCPs seeing patients with Alzheimer’s disease? Methods. Data from 262 HCPs participating in an educational activity on AD were analyzed using PredictCME. A question related to practice behavior was entered into the model as the response variable, with variables such as knowledge, number of patients seen with AD, years in practice, and confidence entered as predictor variables. Results. Results showed that the strongest predictor of practice behavior was confidence. A secondary predictor was the number of patients with AD seen by the learners. Discussion. For future activities, it will be important to consider ways to improve HCP confidence as well as address the needs of HCPs who don’t see a large number of patients with AD. Findings from the PredictCME analysis demonstrate the utility in using predictive modeling to better understand the influences of practice behavior, which in turn will help maximize the impact of future activities, and ultimately patient outcomes. 



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

10:00am

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 2. “We’re on the same team”: What non-physician team members want new physicians to know about their role.
10:15 AM - 10:30 AM

“We’re on the same team”: What non-physician team members want new physicians to know about their role.

M. Garth-Pelly, E. Shearer, A.J. Millet, S. Bereknyei, A. Aaronson, D. Svec, S. Stafford, Stanford Hospital
Abstract Body: Introduction The ability to use knowledge of our own and other’s role to address the health needs of patients and populations is a core competency for interprofessional collaborative practice1. This research seeks to illuminate topics that non-physician healthcare professionals would like new physicians to know about their role, with the aim of promoting improved interprofessional collaboration. Research Question What do non-physician members of the interdisciplinary team want new physicians to know about their profession and role? Methods We conducted focus groups at one academic center with pharmacists, social workers, case managers, dietitians, nurses, and rehab therapists in adult care. Participant recruitment was via word of mouth, email, fliers, and tabling. A semi-structured interview guide was employed to gather information including 1) self-described role on the healthcare team, 2) experiences collaborating with medical teams, 3) most misunderstood elements of their profession. One medical student researcher conducted all focus groups. Two coders used an exploratory (inductive) approach to develop and apply the codebook. An inter-rater reliability test was performed to assess for coding drift. Team-based theme analysis was performed to identify within-group and across health professional group themes. Results We conducted 7 focus groups with 42 total participants. Preliminary results identified 3 themes. 1) Each profession identified misconceptions they want addressed (eg. rehab therapists described being over-consulted when new physicians believe they need rehab to ensure a patient is mobilizing—they describe mobilization as a team effort and the rehab therapist’s role is to address more skilled needs). 2) Professionals felt their expertise is not sufficiently incorporated into care plans (eg. dietitians feel their expertise in medical nutrition therapy can have a large impact on outcomes but they have insufficient opportunities to impact care). 3) Participants wanted new physicians to show more curiosity to learn about non-physician expertise and roles, stating that if new physicians are unsure, part of the interprofessional experience is to ask. Discussion The experiences of non-physician members on the interprofessional healthcare team show that more remains to be done in medical education to ensure that new physicians understand the roles and how to incorporate the expertise of non-physician colleagues. Medical students should have focused curriculum on healthcare professional roles they will interact with in the clinical setting. 1Interprofessional Education Collaborative (2016). Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice. 

Speakers
avatar for Mariposa Garth-Pelly

Mariposa Garth-Pelly

Mariposa Garth-Pelly is a 2nd year medical student at Stanford University. Prior to medical school she worked as a nurse in an Intermediate ICU at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition to a B.S.N. from Inter American University of Puerto Rico, Mariposa holds a B.A. in Urban Studies from Brown University. Research interests include healthcare team dynamics and interprofessional collaboration.



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

10:00am

DEER VALLEY - [Oral Presentation] 3. A method for calculating the costs of medical education and opportunities for value analysis
10:30 AM - 10:45 AM

A method for calculating the costs of medical education and opportunities for value analysis

S. Lamb, J. Lindsley, D. Roussel, T. Tsai, L. Boi, S. Petersen, M. Lauder, W. Samuelson, A. Stevenson, K. Shaffer, J. Colbert Getz, University of Utah
 Abstract Body: Context The skyrocketing cost of healthcare is a global problem. Likewise, debt for medical school graduates has been rising faster than inflation over the last 20 years (Youngclaus 2012). Despite increasing student tuition, the total cost of medical student education is rising even faster. Changing economics, fiscal pressures and new focus on higher quality and lower cost require a new operating model for academic medicine; every aspect of academic medical centers is undergoing transformation including how care is delivered, how students and residents are educated and how research is funded (Enders 2014). There is increasing recognition that the whole issue of cost and value in health professions education is important (Walsh 2014). Yet, to date the field has not figured out how best to determine the cost of medical education. Objectives 1. Describe the method used to calculate actual costs of the University of Utah School of Medicine (UUSOM) undergraduate medical education program 2. Review annual cost data for the UUSOM medical education program 3. Propose opportunities to use cost information for data driven analysis of resource utilization in medical education programming and planning Key Message The UUSOM has adapted a tool utilized at the University of Utah Health Sciences Center that successfully lowers costs of healthcare while improving patient outcomes (Lee 2016) for use by the educational program. The tool, known as Value Driven Outcomes (VDO), aggregates Professional and Facility Costs and assigns these costs to the corresponding clinical encounters (Kawamoto 2015). Data are aggregated in the University’s Data Warehouse where they are then available for reporting and analytics. We adapted the VDO framework to calculate the cost of the medical school program. This is providing an opportunity for data-driven analysis of resource utilization in medical education by the UUSOM. We believe this method can be replicated by other medical schools to allow them to calculate the actual costs of education for their program. Future utilization of this method can inform decisions about new programming, program change and quality improvement in education. Conclusion The costs of medical education likely varies among medical school programs; few can say they know the real cost of medical education. As a first step we have identified the categories of cost and actual dollar amounts for undergraduate medical education. This effort combined with future collaborative work with other institutions will help leaders make informed decisions about fiscal planning relating to education. 

Speakers
avatar for Michael Lauder

Michael Lauder

University of Utah School of Medicine
avatar for Danielle Roussel

Danielle Roussel

Assistant Dean for Clinical Curriculum, University of Utah
avatar for Kerri Shaffer

Kerri Shaffer

Director of Curriculum and Faculty Support, University of Utah School of Medicine


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

10:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 1. Transition to Medical School: A Novel Approach to New Student Orientation
10:00 AM - 10:15 AM

Transition to Medical School: A Novel Approach to New Student Orientation

K. Shaffer, S. Baumann, J. Colbert-Getz, T. Hurtado, School of Medicine, University of Utah
Abstract Body: Context This presentation will describe the implementation of a Transition to Medical School course offered by the University of Utah School of Medicine. Recognizing the need for explicit self-regulated learning training for new medical students, and acknowledging the limits of traditional first year orientation to provide students with the resources needed to succeed academically and personally, the Offices of Curriculum and Student Affairs collaborated on creating Transition to Medical School (TTMS) in place of the existing first year orientation. To design the course we used Kern’s six-step approach to curriculum development, beginning with a needs assessment (recently published in Teaching and Learning in Medicine). The result was a hybrid, conference-style course where logistical information and compliance forms were stored in an LMS for students to complete on their own time, and to refer back to as needed. This helped to reduce extraneous load by allowing students to focus on information that was more germane to their learning. The in-person event was a week long, and included a combination of plenaries and optional breakout sessions divided into four tracks: Academic Success, Professionalism and Culture, Interpersonal and Wellness, and Social Connections. Objectives 1. Describe the course development process: problem identification, needs assessment, goals and objectives, educational strategies, implementation, and evaluation. 2. Discuss feedback and next steps. Key Message Rather than spending valuable face-to-face time providing didactic and logistical information to new students, that time is better spent preparing them to be self-regulated learners by setting the foundation with just-in-time, learning to learn sessions. Conclusion While more time and study are needed to evaluate whether the course had a sustained effect on student learning, the feedback from MS1s (N = 128, 100% response rate), and presenters (N = 36, 50% response rate) was overwhelmingly positive. Students enjoyed having the opportunity to decide which breakout sessions to attend and the option to skip sessions they felt were irrelevant to them. This resulted in an overall satisfaction with the experience. Further, a welcome side effect of the new format was that incoming students recognized the time, care, and effort that went into the course, which set a tone of mutual trust and appreciation between students, faculty, and administrators. 

Speakers
avatar for Kerri Shaffer

Kerri Shaffer

Director of Curriculum and Faculty Support, University of Utah School of Medicine



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
SUNDANCE

10:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 2. Students perceptions of their experiences and contributions during a longitudinal clinical immersion course for first year medical students
10:15 AM - 10:30 AM

Students perceptions of their experiences and contributions during a longitudinal clinical immersion course for first year medical students

M. Sow, K. Osborn, S. Bereknyei Merrell, E. Schillinger, Stanford University School of Medicine
Abstract Body: INTRODUCTION: There is growing consensus that early patient experiences are an important part of medical education. At our institution, we offer an elective course that provides year-long, longitudinal clinical experiences for first-year medical students, matching students with a clinical site and mentor for one half day a week for the academic year. In 2015-16, students received training in health coaching, medication reconciliation, motivational interviewing, and change leadership, gained early insight into patient-team interactions, the healthcare system, and began to integrate their evolving skills into the clinical environment. RESEARCH QUESTION(S): What are student perceptions of the value of their experiences working with and contributing to patient health, communities and healthcare systems during an early, longitudinal clinical immersion experience? METHODS: Students were asked to complete quarterly post-course surveys. Scope was narrowed to two qualitative free-response items: 1) student experiences working with patients and communities and 2) contribution to the improvement of patient health or healthcare systems or communities. Systematic qualitative analysis was applied to summarize data and identify trends. Responses were analyzed by 2 independent analysts, compared and adjudicated for code application discrepancies. RESULTS: Of 13 participants, 12 responded to the survey at end of quarter 1, 10 at quarter 2, and 10 at quarter 3. The 64 responses gathered were parsed by quarter. Quarter 1 themes revealed the experience had positive impact on some students, while some found it a challenge to integrate themselves into clinic in a meaningful way. Variability was based on perceived level of site and team integration. Quarter 2 themes highlighted an increased student perception of patient encounters within interactions: telephone health coaching, team based practice, and discharge procedure planning skills. Most participants reported increased impact due to continued longitudinal clinical interactions, though integration remained a challenge for a subset. Quarter 3 themes elucidated an increased awareness of socio-economic impact, enhanced communication skills, sustained positive impact; healthcare system contributions more broadly remained mixed, but improving. DISCUSSION: The course aided acclimatization to clinical practice, and development of clinical and communication skills, for most students. Student perception of value varied, with more positive experiences reported by students who integrated at sites into roles that utilized patient communication skills. Additional research needs to be conducted to assess the impact of curricular and clinic onboarding improvements made in the current academic year, to better understand which variables correlate to perceived positive contribution to patient health and/or healthcare systems. 


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

10:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 3. Development of a Content Outline for Undergraduate Critical Care Education using a Modified Delphi Method
10:30 AM - 10:45 AM

Development of a Content Outline for Undergraduate Critical Care Education using a Modified Delphi Method

A. Smith, K. Campell, University of Utah
J. Brainard, University of Colorado
Abstract Body: Introduction Critical care education is an important part of undergraduate medical education (UME). The Association of American Medical Colleges states that physicians entering residency should be competent in recognizing and initiating the management of a deteriorating patient who requires emergent care. One opportunity to learn such skills and knowledge is by caring for critically-ill patients. However, there is currently no available data or consensus on what students should learn regarding critical care. This lack of consensus is in contrast to other specialties, which have national content outlines that assist educators in designing curriculums. Other specialties have utilized Delphi consensus methods to develop content outlines. The aim of this research is to develop a national critical care content outline through a multidisciplinary expert consensus process to improve medical student education related to the management of deteriorating and critically-ill patients. Research Question 1) What are the core critical care skills and knowledge that should be learned during a UME critical care experience? Methods We use a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on the core skills and knowledge that should be learned during a UME critical care experience. The Delphi panel included 3 expert groups: 1) UME critical care educators identified through the Society of Critical Care Medicine; 2) residency program directors nominated by their respective national organizations; and 3) residency-level trainees nominated to represent residents of their respective specialties. Over three, iterative rounds, the Delphi panel will reach consensus on the critical care skills and knowledge expected of graduating medical students. Results The Delphi is currently beginning its third round. We expect completion of the Delphi by December 2016. The panel consists of 28 experts. The following specialties are represented: Internal Medicine (n=4), Emergency Medicine (n=6), Surgery (n=5), Anesthesia (n=6), Pediatrics (n=5), Ob/Gyn (n=2). Seventeen participants have sub-specialty training in critical care. Eight participants are currently in residency training. Consensus on the critical care skills and knowledge expected of graduating medical students is pending. Discussion The results of our Delphi will provide a national, consensus content outline for critical care in UME. By including experts from various disciplines, our content outline will be meaningful for all graduating students, independent of their intended specialty. The content outline will represent the first step for educators in the development of local and national UME critical care curriculums. 



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
SUNDANCE

10:00am

(BRIGHTON) Beyond Content: Evaluating Effects of Curricular Change
Abstract Body: Objectives: 1. Discuss the impact of a targeted curricular change ( on both the cognitive and affective domains of student learning. 2. Identify tools that can assess the impact of curricular change on the affective domain of learning. 3. Outline strategies to evaluate impact of curricular change on both the cognitive and affective domains of learning. Session Format: A brief summary (15 minutes) will be presented by an anatomy instructor (in a Cell Biology and Physiology department), and an educational researcher (in a Biochemistry and Molecular Biology department), on a recent curricular change that integrated anatomy content within the organ system courses rather than presenting anatomy as a separate course. Initial evidence indicates that this change led to improved anatomy content mastery as well as differences in student attitudes, including aspects of professional identity and confidence. A think-pair-share activity (15 minutes) among session participants will be based around the following prompts: 1. Give examples of possible ways curricular change could influence student learning. 2. If your program has changed or is planning curricular change, what specific non-cognitive outcomes (if any) did or will you track. 3. What tools are you aware of or would you like to have to measure these outcomes. Participants will be encouraged to use a provided template to identify assessment tools that measure impact of curricular change on domains of learning in the context of their home institution. A group discussion (15 minutes) will provide an opportunity to learn about assessment/evaluation strategies used by different programs to track the potential influence of curricular revision. Intended Outcome: Raising awareness about non-cognitive outcomes resulting from changes in a medical curriculum and sharing of assessment tools and strategies to capture these effects. Target Audience: Medical educators, administrators and medical students interested in a broader spectrum of effects on learning as a result of curricular change.



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
BRIGHTON

10:00am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) The Fellowship Applicant Interview Process: Keys to a Successful Selection (Oakley Preston)
Abstract Body: Objectives Summarize changes in the University of Utah Endocrinology Fellowship selection process. Engage participants in sharing their own selection processes. Engage participants in designing a standardized selection process that optimizes the likelihood of selecting fellow candidates who will succeed at the institution. Methods The fellowship application process from the program’s perspective consists of 3 stages, which includes application review, the interview, and the post-interview ranking process. This is quite challenging at every stage since the applicants have varied experiences in education, clinical & community outreach activities, teaching, and research. Also, their personality, ability to communicate effectively, interest in the respective specialty, exam scores, letters of recommendation, and their potential to ‘fit’ well into a program are all extremely important factors to be considered during the ranking process. The varied experiences of different applicants should be weighed on the same platform using a judicious, reproducible and systematic process. This is extremely challenging due to a multitude of interviewee and interviewer related factors, both academic and personality. The University of Utah Endocrinology Fellowship program recently changed from recruiting 1 fellow per year for a required 3-year fellowship to 2 fellows per year for the ACGME required 2-year fellowship. We also changed our process from including a few faculty in the selection process to all faculty. About 58 prospective fellows apply every year, 10-30 applicants are invited for a personal interview, and a selected percentage of them are ranked. The fellowship training involves a close interaction between a small group of faculty and fellows almost on a daily basis throughout the training period which is very different from large residency programs where trainees have limited interaction with the same faculty. Also, fellows are considered ‘adult learners’ compared to residents and a higher emphasis is placed on research and leadership prospects during fellowship selection. Intended Outcomes Understanding the similarities and differences between residency and fellowship selection process. Exchange of ideas about increased value for our effort and identify best practices. Establishing a focus group interested to interact and share ideas about this in the future. Target Audience Program directors, assistant directors, and faculty Trainees (fellows, residents, and medical students) Training program managers and coordinators Undergraduate Medical Education faculty and staff 



Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

10:00am

(SNOWBIRD) A Deeper Dive into Curriculum Mapping: Creating a Searchable Curriculum Map
Abstract Body: Objectives: After this session, attendees will be able to: Describe the purpose and utility of curriculum mapping in medical education. Conceptualize a simple curriculum map design and how it can be leveraged to perform robust curriculum searches and report on curriculum gaps, redundancies, and course design and evaluations. Discuss the experiences, hurdles, and best practices of a medical school who recently implemented a curriculum map, search tool, and reporting system. Problem: As medical schools move forward with developing curriculum mapping frameworks to better capture and evaluate their programs, many have realized just how limited the available resources and stated best practices are in this area. Also limited are affordable, adaptable, yet robust software options for searching and reporting on curriculum data. Methods: The presenters will share lessons-learned and best practices identified while developing a curriculum map, search tool, and reporting system at the University of Colorado School of Medicine (CUSOM). While this discussion will focus on the use of Tableau® software as an interactive data visualization tool, the design of the curriculum data mapping that will be presented also lends itself to using universally-available software such as Microsoft Excel and Access software for data searches and reporting. The small group discussion will focus on sharing other schools’ efforts in curriculum mapping design, and curriculum search and reporting tools. Topics covered will include: Overview of the purpose, goals, and utility of curriculum mapping in undergraduate medical education. Overview of the curriculum mapping framework implemented at the CUSOM. Demonstration of an interactive data visualization software, Tableau®, used to provide a robust curriculum search tool, along with user-defined reporting capabilities. Lessons learned and considerations for creating a sustainable curriculum map and reporting system. The CUSOM began their curriculum mapping initiative in 2014. The primary driver for this effort was similar to many other medical schools’ – the need to be able to effectively capture, monitor, and report on the medical school program’s curriculum. After pursuing several different curriculum mapping software solutions, a simple “home-grown” curriculum mapping structure was designed and implemented. The simplicity of the curriculum map design facilitated the use of a robust, cost-effective interactive data visualization software, Tableau®. This presentation will highlight CUSOM’s curriculum map and provide a demonstration of the newly-launched curriculum search tool. In addition, we will share Tableau’s reporting capabilities used to both assess course design and inform course evaluations. Target Audience: Curriculum deans, faculty, education technology, curriculum administrators. 

Speakers
avatar for Michele Doucette

Michele Doucette

Assistant Dean of Integrated Curriculum, University of Colorado School of Medicine
I currently serve as the Assistant Dean of Integrated Curriculum for Undergraduate Medical Education at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Much of my current focus centers on managing, collecting, validating, and mapping course curricular elements for all four phases of the medical school curriculum. In addition, I oversee the day-to-day management and delivery of the Medical School curriculum.


Monday February 27, 2017 10:00am - 10:45am
SNOWBIRD

11:00am

11:00am

(ARCHES) Open Access Publishing in 2017: The Pros and Cons of Disseminating Outcomes of Educational Scholarship Via Open Access Journals
Abstract Body: Introduction: With the relatively recent introduction of academic tracks for educators, the rapid rise of numerous degree granting programs in medical education, and other trends encouraging faculty to seek academic advancement via the scholarship of integration, application or teaching (Boyer 1990), often referred to as educational scholarship, the number of individuals seeking scholarly publications in medical education is increasing dramatically. Acceptance rates in traditional medical education print-based journals are dropping as the number of submissions grows. Are we creating a “perfect storm” in which faculty expectations for career success as an educational scholar will be dashed on the shoals of failed attempts to publish scholarly investigations? So what’s to be done? Might the increasing availability of open access, on-line journals be a possible solution? Because open access publishing is still relatively new, the pros and cons of this approach are not well understood by many medical educators. According to growing bodies of evidence, both formal and informal (e.g., https://www.tue.nl/en/university/library/education-research-support/scientific-publishing/open-access-coach/basic-concepts-and-background/pros-and-cons-of-open-access/), the pros include: "enhanced visibility and impact of one's own work as open access articles are downloaded and cited more frequently than articles from non-open access journals"; "free access to scientific knowledge, information and data which strengthens the basis for transfer (education), development (research) and valorization of knowledge"; and "faster turnaround time from submission to publication". The cons include: quality because open access journals do not have an established reputation; open access publishing is more costly for the scholars; and "predatory open access journals try to mislead and cheat authors". Objectives: 1) Understand trends leading to increased difficulty in publishing scholarship. 2) Describe pros of open access options. 3) Describe cons of open access options. Methods: In this panel discussion about the pros and cons of open access publishing, we will dedicate the first 30 minutes to set the stage for the discussion by briefly describing current trends increasing the competitiveness in getting published as a medical educator and describing the current landscape of open access, on-line publishing. We will also solicit personal testimonies from participants about their personal experiences publishing or accessing publications from open access sources. We will then use the remaining 60 minutes to facilitate a panel discussion. This discussion will begin with brief statements from panel members, followed by questions and statements from the audience. Outcomes: The last 5 minutes will be reserved for the moderator to make concluding remarks and recommendations. Intended Audience: WGEA members interested in promoting educational scholarship as a path to academic advancement 


Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
ARCHES

11:00am

(BRIGHTON) Health Coaching: Empowering Students to Empower Patients
Abstract Body: Medical students strive to be of help to patients and healthcare teams during early clinical experiences. Providers frequently feel too rushed to adequately discuss with patients multiple diagnoses and treatment goals, and research confirms that patients often leave medical visits without fully understanding the medical information they receive1,2. Health coaches help patients to develop the skills, attitudes, and knowledge they need to become informed, active participants in their own health care. Patients who work with health coaches have better control of their chronic medical conditions and have lower rates of re-hospitalization3,4. Three regional institutions implemented health coaching curricula in order to provide an authentic role for students to improve patient understanding of treatment plans and goals. Training students in health coaching techniques enables students to add value to the clinical encounter. Learning Objectives: Define health coaching; identify three reasons why teaching medical students health coaching skills may benefit students, care teams, and patients Discuss health coaching curricula from three medical schools Prepare for implementing a health coaching curriculum at home institutions Methods: 10 minutes: Overview of health coaching, introduction of panelists 30 minutes: Panelists from three medical schools describe their health coaching curricula 20 minutes: Panelists demonstrate health coaching skills; audience participates 20 minutes: Participants discuss how coaching skills are relevant for medical students and how to implement, and/or expand, health coaching curricula at their home institutions 10 minutes: Debrief in large group about plans and potential challenges for developing health coaching curricula at home institutions Intended Outcomes: Participants will become familiar with a curricular innovation that has the potential to support student professional identity formation, improve student communication skills, enhance student efficacy in having an authentic role in the health care team, empower patients in their own health care, and improve patient outcomes. Participants will gain the knowledge and skills to begin developing a health coaching curriculum at their home institution. Target Audience: WGEA members: faculty, student, resident, staff attendees References: Ghorob A et al. Health coaching. Virtual Mentor. 2013 Apr 1;15(4):319-26 Bennett HD et al. Health coaching for patients with chronic illness. Fam Pract Manag. 2010;17(5):24-29 Willard-Grace R et al. Health Coaching by Medical Assistants to Improve Control of Diabetes, Hypertension, and Hyperlipidemia in Low-Income Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Family Medicine. 2015; 13(2): 130-138. Benzo R et al. Health coaching and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease rehospitalization: a randomized study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016 Sep 15;194(6):672-80 


Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
BRIGHTON

11:00am

(DEER VALLEY) Digital Tools to Promote Knowledge and Clinical Skill Translation
Abstract Body: Objectives 1. Compare and contrast leading models of how knowledge and skills can be transferred from the classroom to the clinic. 2. Provide 3 contrasting examples of how technology has been used to facilitate classroom-to-clinic skill transfer in health professional trainees. 3. Explore how effective skill transfer interventions can improve value and quality by making evidence-based treatments more readily available with enhanced fidelity. Methods This panel presentation begins with an overview of leading knowledge and skill translation models with a particular focus on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Using TPB, the performance of a newly learned clinical skill is driven by beliefs about the skill, perceptions about the social norms and desirability of the skill, and “perceived behavioral control” which includes trainee confidence, supervisory support, and other external facilitating conditions such as the clinic setting or competing demands. Unfortunately, trainees (and/or their clinic settings) are often undeveloped in one or more of these areas and fail to successfully transfer skills from classroom to clinic. 3 contrasting examples of digital tools to facilitate knowledge and skill transfer will be described and demonstrated by the panelists. First, a TPB-based mobile app for screening and brief interventions for alcohol and drug use will be described along with an in-progress randomized trial of multidisciplinary learners at 3 universities who are currently testing it. Second, a multi-modal iPad mini toolbox designed to facilitate the translation of advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) clinical skills from the classroom to the primary care practice setting will be described. The particular focus of this technology is to reach under-resourced rural communities with limited access to evidence-based treatments or quality supervision. Lastly, a leading educational technologist will demonstrate two mobile apps to improve the quality of the neurological and musculoskeletal physical exams. Panelist will describe their conceptualization of skill transfer, how their translational tool was developed, and how the tool affects the availability and quality of evidence-based interventions. Both qualitative and quantitative data will be used to discuss the effects of these digital tools on learners, supervisors, and clinical practice settings. A discussant will summarize lessons learned and next steps followed by time for audience discussion. Intended Outcomes Through the intervention demonstrations and discussion with this multidisciplinary and multi-university panel, attendees will be better equipped to understand the theoretical challenges and potential solutions for knowledge and skill translation. Target Audience Health professional educators, clinical supervisors, learners, and technologists 



Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
DEER VALLEY

11:00am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Learner Wellbeing Seen Through Different Lenses: Resilience versus Respite
Abstract Body: Background: That burnout is prevalent among learners and adversely affects both learner wellbeing and patient care is well recognized. Acknowledging this, Schools have developed wellness programs and curricula while attempting to improve the learning environment and decrease learner stress and mistreatment. Despite these efforts learner stress and burnout appears to be on the rise. One hypothesis for this paradoxical effect is that wellness efforts often seem reactive, sub optimally integrated into the learning environment, and for the most part focused on ‘respite’ activities for learners. Moreover, such programs often seem to lack an explicitly articulated theoretical framework to guide them. Whether these activities promote (or hinder) learner resilience as opposed to purely providing a venue for learners to decompress and compartmentalize their lives, is a cause for concern and deserving of exploration. Objectives: At the end of the session, participants should be better able to: 1) Compare and contrast wellness, resilience and grit, in the context of learners 2) Analyze the efficacy of wellness programs and activities using different psychological constructs and educational theory, and 3) Propose strategies that promote learner ‘wholeness’ Methods: OVERVIEW and INTRODUCTION (15 minutes): The session will begin with a brief overview of the imperatives for addressing learner wellbeing in today’s era and the literature pertaining to wellness programs and curricula. We will then introduce basic constructs of cognitive load theory, resilience and grit to set the stage to explore wellness efforts that programs have adopted and examine their benefits and possible unintended consequences. BRIEF PRESENTATIONS (35 MINUTES): We will then outline the experience of a few different Schools with wellness programs and curricular interventions; each school will discuss these programs from various frameworks and engage the audience in brainstorming the potential impact of these programs on learners and the School as a whole. SMALL GROUP BREAKOUT SESSION (25 Minutes): (facilitated by the presenters at the tables) Participants will use structured worksheets to analyze their own School’s learner wellness plans (existing or proposed) and deconstruct them using the principles of cognitive load theory and the psychological constructs reviewed previously. The goal of this part of the session will be to strategize how best to develop and implement wellness programs and minimize their unintended consequences. WRAP UP and SUMMARY (15 minutes): Large group report back on solutions and strategies to move this forward at participants’ institutions, Questions, Commitment to act Intended Outcomes: To explore current practices related to learner wellness in the context of education theory and different psychological constructs, and propose strategies that aim at making learners more ‘whole’ and resilient in the face of day to day challenges posed by the health care learning environment. Target Audience: Educators and educational administrators involved in curriculum development, admissions and student affairs who are interested in learner wellbeing 



Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

11:00am

(SNOWBIRD) Best Practices for Using Your Curriculum Management System
Abstract Body: For nearly two decades, schools have been developing systems for managing curriculum content and / or contracting with vendors for curriculum management. Schools invest time, finances, energy, committee time, and human resources in these Curriculum Management Systems. This investment should result in more informed curriculum administrators, committees, faculty, staff, and students using reports that inform curriculum decisions, continuous quality improvement and benchmarking efforts; and tracking of competencies, key terminology, and themes / special emphases. There are multiple methods for leveraging the power of a well-populated curriculum management system. This session will provide examples from three medical schools regarding best practices for collecting and entering data, using curriculum management system reports to inform curriculum committees, and conducting continuous quality improvement using curriculum management systems. Participants will also have the opportunity to share their best practices and learn from others in small group discussions. The session will conclude with a short overview of how local curriculum management system data can be benchmarked with national curriculum data. Objectives: At the conclusion of this session, participants will be able to: *Review features of Curriculum Management Systems *Explain the types of data that are important to the success of a Curriculum Management System *Discuss how Curriculum Management Systems can support curriculum committee discussions, administrative decisions, and student preparation for the curriculum *Share opportunities and challenges from other medical schools *Demonstrate how local curriculum data can be benchmarked with national data Schedule: Welcome and Introduction of Presenters and Topic: 5 minutes Moderated panel presentation of Curriculum Management System Best Practices: 8 Minutes each (24 minutes) Group Discussion & Brainstorming: 45 minutes *What are Best Practices for the types of data that should be collected? *What are Best Practices for collecting curriculum data? *What are Best Practices for using curriculum data to support Curriculum Committees, Administrators, Faculty, Students, and Staff? *What are Best Practices for using curriculum data to support benchmarking, CQI, curriculum review/renewal, and accreditation? *What features are necessary in a Curriculum Management System to support these Best Practices? Reports Back / Large Group Discussion: 10 minutes Using your Curriculum Management System with the Curriculum Inventory: 5 minutes (Cameron) 

Speakers
avatar for Terri Cameron

Terri Cameron

Director of Curriculum Programs, Association of American Medical Colleges
Terri Cameron, MA, has been leading the development of a revised national curriculum inventory at the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) since 2006. As Director of Curriculum Programs, she is responsible for developing and maintaining the Curriculum Inventory, contributing to the other Medical Academic Performance Services (MedAPS) initiatives, and building liaison relationships for MedAPS with medical schools. Prior to coming to the... Read More →
avatar for Brady Janes

Brady Janes

Director, Curriculum Development and Assessment, University of Nevada School of Medicine
avatar for Kevin H. Souza

Kevin H. Souza

Associate Dean, UC San Francisco
Kevin H. Souza serves as Associate Dean for Medical Education at the University of California, San Francisco, and was the founding director of the Office of Educational Technology (now Technology Enhanced Learning). | | He has administrative responsibility over the medical education programs and programmatic oversight of educational technology and simulation activities in the school. | | His professional interests include cultivating... Read More →



Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
SNOWBIRD

11:00am

(SUNDANCE) Help Me Help You: Systematic Review Consultations at the Library
Abstract Body: Objectives: 1. Describe ideal versus real process for conducting systematic review 2. Address challenges and pressures facing systematic review authors as well as the benefits of properly conducted systematic reviews 3. Evaluate the advantages of different library service models for systematic review research teams Methods: A panel of librarians currently providing systematic review services will discuss the prescribed methodology and the practice of systematic reviews as educational tools. The panelists will focus on building protocols, conducting and documenting search strategies, citation management support, grey literature, writing methods sections, etc. But the discussion will also address broader scholarly communication issues including authorship, data management, and selecting journals for publication. Lastly, librarians will share their experiences in offering advice regarding curricular decisions for medical student and resident projects. Intended Outcomes 1. Inclusion of librarians on systematic review research teams 2. Address methodological issues with published systematic reviews 3. Craft appropriate systematic review projects for graduate and undergraduate medical students Target Audience: faculty, researchers, librarians, graduate medical students, and undergraduate medical students 

Speakers
JD

Jennifer Dinalo

Information Services Librarian, Norris Medical Library at USC
RJ

Robert Johnson

My name is Robert Johnson so every permutation of my name has been taken. That's why I'm "NotFunnyAtAll"
avatar for L. Kysh

L. Kysh

Clinical & Research Librarian, University of Southern California & Children's Hospital Los Angeles


Monday February 27, 2017 11:00am - 12:30pm
SUNDANCE

12:30pm

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) LUNCH (included in registration fee)
Buffet:
caesar salad
arcadian field greens
tomato bisque
chef's seasonal soup
carrot cake 

Monday February 27, 2017 12:30pm - 1:45pm
CANYONS AND BRYCE

12:30pm

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) Donut Hole: Life in the Medicaid Coverage Gap (Student-made documentary)
This documentary explores the lives of those affected by the Medicaid Expansion Gap. The film was made in Utah, but the same principles apply to all states that have yet to expand Medicaid. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaHMtQZtsc0


Monday February 27, 2017 12:30pm - 1:45pm
CANYONS AND BRYCE

12:45pm

(DEER VALLEY) MESRE Business Meeting
Discuss grant opportunities through WGEA and GEA. 



Monday February 27, 2017 12:45pm - 1:40pm
DEER VALLEY

2:00pm

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) Plenary Speaker Vivian Lee
Speakers
avatar for Vivian Lee, M.D., Ph.D., MBA

Vivian Lee, M.D., Ph.D., MBA

Senior Vice President, University of Utah Health Sciences Dean, University of Utah School of Medicine CEO, University of Utah Health Care, University of Utah Health Sciences
Since July of 2011, Dr. Vivian S. Lee has served as Senior Vice President for Health Sciences, Dean of the University’s School of Medicine, and CEO of University of Utah Health Care. She is responsible for an annual budget of $3.3 billion, including a healthcare system, health plan, and Schools of Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, Health, and a new School of Dentistry. A graduate of Harvard-Radcliffe, Dr. Lee received a doctorate in medical... Read More →



Monday February 27, 2017 2:00pm - 3:00pm
CANYONS AND BRYCE

3:15pm

(SIDEWINDER) Introduction to the GSA Professional Development Initiative
Abstract Body: ABSTRACT This interactive, hands-on 90 minute session will introduce participants to the GSA Performance Framework and professional development support toolkit. Participants will learn firsthand how the GSA Performance Framework and tools can benefit their professional development efforts and results for them and their schools. More specifically, participants will put the Framework in motion as they reflect on their current capabilities and explore with fellow participants opportunities to apply the toolkit to enhance their specific professional development practices. PROPOSAL The GSA Professional Development Initiative (PDI) is a collaborative partnership between the AAMC and the GSA community designed to help all GSA professionals: Stay relevant in the dynamic medical school environment. Realize their potential and have a fulfilling career in student affairs. Work collaboratively within and across student affairs at their school. Develop a strong network of collegial support in the student affairs medical school community. This workshop will introduce the GSA Performance Framework which sets the benchmark of performance excellence and distinguishes the importance of student affairs in medical education as a profession. The Performance Framework outlines critical behaviors essential for successful performance and career progression, inclusive of all roles and functions across the GSA community, in alignment with the LCME standards. Additional content will provide an overview of how the tools and resources developed can help professionals grow in their current role. The GSA PDI toolkit is a collection of guides that aim to complement and enhance professional development practices across the GSA community. Participants will participate in a reflective activity utilizing some of the available tools to get them thinking about their professional development. This workshop is of interest to student affairs professionals representing all roles and functions across the GSA community. LEARNING OBJECTIVES At the conclusion of this session, participants will be able to: Describe the case for professional development and its value to the Student Affairs community. Understand the GSA Performance Framework as a foundational tool and recognize its various components. Raise awareness of the tools that accompany the GSA Performance Framework, their uses, and how to access them. Identify ways in which the GSA Performance Framework and tools can be used beyond professional development to enhance your institution’s practices. 

Speakers

Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
SIDEWINDER

3:15pm

(ARCHES) Developing faculty educator competencies in diverse learning environments
Abstract Body: Topics of inclusion and diversity have gained new attention among medical educators in the wake of activism by medical students in regards to issues impacting communities of color. Specifically, the impact of police brutality and continuing healthcare disparities led a group of students at a recognized medical school to organize “White Coats for Black Lives” movement. Their first action, a “Die In” in December 2014, was organized in protest and solidarity with the victims of police brutality in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases.[1] The student’s activity led the school to launch a comprehensive five year funded effort known as the Differences Matter (DM). The goal of DM is “to close gaps in inequities in health and health care across all of our mission areas” including medical education. [2] This initiative seeks to “ensure inclusive teaching and integration of race, racism, exclusion and health disparities relevant competencies”. These stated goals require the development of similar competencies for the faculty educators. The goal of this small group is to discuss the development of faculty educator competencies in diverse learning environments. The suggested methodology for this session will be as follows: Review background of Differences Matter and learning development goals Share results of literature review and best practices Present our current efforts related to the development of faculty competencies and ensuing activities. Intended Outcomes: Increase awareness about efforts in a given medical school to develop competencies among faculty to be able to teach in diverse learning environments Engage in discussion with participants about what should be the key core competencies in medical education within the context of increasing need for inclusion, diversity and equity. Intended Audience: This small session hopes to draw those involved in medical education and/or student affairs. [1] Differences Matter (2015). Project Charter. Project Identification and Purpose. [2] Differences Matter (2015). Project Charter. Project Identification and Purpose. 



Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
ARCHES

3:15pm

(BRIGHTON) Quality in Undergraduate Medical Education – How do we define it?
Abstract Body: Objectives 1. Describe how a competing values framework, borrowed from business, can be utilized to define quality in medical education 2. Use a competing values framework to categorize and expand a list of quality indicators 3. Recognize how value and quality is dynamic and affected by idiosyncratic institutional missions Methods In their increasingly popular book, The Competing Values Leadership: Creating Value in Organizations (2006), Cameron et al, propose a dynamic relationship between value and quality. They identify four broad categories of value: vision, compete, control and collaborate. In response to conditions in and out of the organization, values change and so will the meaning of quality. In this session, we will employ a competing values framework, adapted from Cameron et al, to identify competing values in undergraduate medical education (UME) and to explore how the relative importance of these values change according to our definitions of quality. There is little evidence as to what forms of health professions education are cost effective or have favorable cost-benefit or cost-utility ratios (Walsh K et al, 2004). The University of Utah School of Medicine proposes an equation for defining value as: V=(Q+E)/C where the value (V) of the UME program is derived from the sum of the quality (Q) of the program and the experiences (E) of the students and faculty delivering the program, divided by the cost (C) required to administer the program. However, to define value, we must first have a clear definition of what constitutes quality in undergraduate medical education, especially in a changing environment (e.g., movement toward competencies, increasing competitiveness of the match, digital revolution). Utilizing a competing values framework adapted from Cameron et al (2006), we will engage the audience in a review of possible indicators of quality and clarify their impact on value. We will dedicate the majority of the workshop to small group work aiming to refine the indicators defining quality in medical education and to more explicitly align them with different possible competing values. Intended Outcomes Participants will emerge with an understanding of a competing values framework that can be used to link quality and value in medical education. These results, and lessons learned about the competing values framework, can be used by schools as they implement new programs or as they review their values and associated quality indicators of existing programs at their institutions. Target Audience Undergraduate medical educators, administrators, students, residents. 

Speakers
avatar for Danielle Roussel

Danielle Roussel

Assistant Dean for Clinical Curriculum, University of Utah
avatar for Kerri Shaffer

Kerri Shaffer

Director of Curriculum and Faculty Support, University of Utah School of Medicine


Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
BRIGHTON

3:15pm

(DEER VALLEY) Student See, Student Do: Mentoring Students in Research Data Management
Abstract Body: Objectives: 1. Identify funder mandates for data sharing 2. Write effective data management plans 3. Documenting data for replication, publication, and sharing 4. Choosing a repository for your data. Methods: Data management is more than a standard part of a research protocol – it is the foundation for evidence-based practice. Research mentorship of medical students and residents is the perfect opportunity to guide new researchers in proper data management practices. This workshop will provide an introduction to best practices in research data management throughout the research data lifecycle. Instructors will first provide an overview of research data management focused on the research data lifecycle and funder mandates, mainly the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Best practices in research data management will focus on research planning, data capture tools and the basics of data management plans. Workshop will be a mix of lecture and hands-on activities. Each activity will be followed by a short discussion period. Activities will revolve around the development of a clinical research project based on a provided scenario. Participants will be able to incorporate this knowledge into their existing research workflows and will gain tools and exercises that can be used to educate graduate and undergraduate medical students. An outline of the workshop schedule is below: Introduction Lecture: Data Management in the Research Cycle Lecture: Metadata Individual Work on Metadata Scavenger Hunt: Find Data Management Requirements in NIH Funding Discussion Lecture: Examples of Data Management Plans in Research Protocols Small Group Activity: Writing Data Management Plans Discussion Lecture: Data Capture Tools Discussion Intended Outcomes 1. List the steps in the research data lifecycle and understand its role in data sharing and reproducibility 2. Create a metadata outline 3. Locate and interpret funder mandates related to data sharing and reproducibility 4. Outline a data management plan 5. Exercise best practices for creating a data capture form Target Audience: This workshop is intended for participants at many levels including faculty, researchers, librarians, graduate medical students, and undergraduate medical students. 

Speakers
JD

Jennifer Dinalo

Information Services Librarian, Norris Medical Library at USC
avatar for L. Kysh

L. Kysh

Clinical & Research Librarian, University of Southern California & Children's Hospital Los Angeles



Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
DEER VALLEY

3:15pm

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Growing Pains: Building and Growing a Thriving Medical Student Wellness Program with Minimal Resources
Abstract
In 2012, The University of Arizona College of Medicine Phoenix (COM-P) received preliminary accreditation to become a separate medical school from the University of Arizona, College of Medicine - Tucson. The inaugural class of 2017 began in the fall of 2013 with a new curriculum. With minimal curricular constraints, widespread institutional support, and a lack of past institutional history, the development of a Wellness Program has blossomed and flourished over the past four years and has become woven into the cultural fabric of the new medical school. However, developing the Wellness program to where it is today took significant time and effort. This discussion/workshop is meant to help guide other colleges in the growth of their medical student wellness programs while discussing tactics and techniques to solve barriers that may arise when developing a program. The workshop will use the College of Medicine’s current Wellness structure and growth as an example.

Overall, the workshop is meant to discuss buy-in, budgeting, program expansion, and curricular development, while encouraging other institutions to create their own proposal/outline for developing a wellness program.

Objectives
Learn how to develop and expand a student wellness program through an internal proposal
Discuss how to overcome the issues and difficulties that come with starting or developing a wellness program
Discuss the different types and approaches to medical student wellness
Individually develop an outline/general proposal/layout for growth

Methods
Small group discussion
Large group sharing
Active participation
Question and answer

Intended Outcomes
Understanding the difficulties of obtaining a budget for Wellness
How to operate a wellness program on a small budget
Developing by-in from the college leadership and immediate medical community
Tricks and tips for inserting wellness related topics into the required medical curriculum
Develop a mission, purpose, and broad outcomes for individual wellness programs and wellness program growth

Target Audience
Student Affairs/Graduate Education professionals who are looking at beginning or growing their medical student wellness programs

Speakers
avatar for Daniel Drane, EdD

Daniel Drane, EdD

Assistant Director, Student Wellness and Engagement, University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix


Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

3:15pm

(SNOWBIRD) Teaching Innovations and Faculty Development through an Implementation Science Lens
 How can institutions decrease the gaps (a) between the dissemination of evidence-based teaching knowledge and actual instructional practice, and (b) between instructional practice and improved learning outcomes? The targeted audience includes faculty developers, leaders who are working to increase use of evidence-based teaching practices and/or to improve student/resident learning, and faculty who seek easier pathways for spreading teaching innovations.

The objectives for this session are for participants to be able to: (1) identify causes for these practice and implementation gaps in medical education; (2) apply concepts from implementation science and organizational learning for closing these gaps; and (3) describe their roles as faculty, leaders, and/or faculty developers for closing these gaps.


Agenda: The workshop will begin with a short explanation of the key concepts of dissemination, implementation, and improvement within an implementation science framework that traditionally focuses on the challenges of transferring bench research and trials to patient health outcomes. This introduction will emphasize the practice and implementation gaps. Then, participants’ experiences with these gaps will be constructed and categorized in small groups and compiled in order to identify common underlying causes for the gaps. Next, groups will be designated to determine the roles of (a) faculty, (b) leadership (deans, department chairs), and (c) faculty developers to create drivers that could close these gaps. The drivers developed by the participants will be integrated with a conceptual model for professional development in medical education (Smith & Stark, 2017, Enhancing continuing professional development with insights from implementation science. In Rayburn, Davis, Turco, eds., Continuing Professional Development in Medicine and Healthcare: Better Education, Improved Outcomes, Best Care. Lippincott). This research-informed model shows where faculty-development programs, built upon critical research-to-practice transfer interventions for individual educators, fit within the larger envelope of workplace learning and organizational context. The session will conclude with an opportunity for each participant (or team from a single institution) to define action items to pursue at their institution, which is seen as the most important outcome for the session.


Speakers
avatar for Gary A Smith

Gary A Smith

Assistant Dean of Faculty Development in Education, University of New Mexico, School of Medicine



Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
SNOWBIRD

3:15pm

(SUNDANCE) Bringing your Exam Questions to Bloom: Writing Effective Open-ended Questions to Test Higher-level Thinking
Abstract Body: Objectives: At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to Provide a rationale for using open-ended exam questions to test higher-level cognitive skills Categorize open-ended exam questions according to levels of Bloom’s taxonomy Write open-ended exam questions that test higher level cognitive skills Construct rubrics that incorporate cognitive skill level for grading open-ended exam questions Background/Methods: With the ever growing expansion of medical knowledge, there is increasing recognition that a physician simply cannot know all there is to know. This realization has led to increasing emphasis on teaching students how to apply knowledge and think critically. Traditional testing methods tend to emphasize recall due to ease of administration, construction and scoring. To match what is taught with what is assessed, alternative testing forms that promote application of knowledge are preferred. Open-ended exam questions are one such testing form, which, when constructed well, can test higher level cognitive skills such as application and evaluation of knowledge. Open-ended exam questions also give insight into students’written communication skills. At the University of California San Francisco, we recently converted all summative exams for the foundational science blocks in the School of Medicine curriculum to open-ended questions. With faculty development this has led to high quality exam questions and rubrics. In this practical, hands-on workshop, participants will learn: a) the rationale for using open-ended exam questions, b) how to construct effective open-ended exam questions that target higher level cognitive skills, and c) how to create appropriately aligned grading rubrics. Outline: 10 minutes: Introduction to the rationale for open-ended exam questions and Bloom’s Taxonomy 15 minutes: Small group exercise: categorize example questions according to Bloom’s taxonomy 10 minutes: Overview of best practices for writing open-ended exam questions 20 min: Small group exercise: writing exam items 10 minutes: Constructing rubrics – an overview of models and uses 15 min: Small group exercise: creating a rubric 10 min: Q&A about UCSF experience, take home lessons Intended outcomes: The goal of this workshop is to empower medical educators with the skills and tools to develop alternative methods of assessment that go beyond the traditional multiple-choice exam questions. We will hand out worksheets and tips to align questions with learning objectives and ensure feasibility of grading using rubrics. This workshop may also spark discussions around the role of assessment in the information era and on best practices for feedback Target Audience: all educators involved in assessment of learners 



Monday February 27, 2017 3:15pm - 4:45pm
SUNDANCE

4:45pm

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) Awards Social (included in registration fee)
Entertainment: 
John Allred (http://www.johnallredmusic.com/)

Food:
short rib sliders
fries, fry sauce
fruit kabob 

AWARDS AND DOOR PRIZE WILL BE PRESENTED (Must be present to win door prize- iPad mini).

Monday February 27, 2017 4:45pm - 6:15pm
CANYONS AND BRYCE
 
Tuesday, February 28
 

7:00am

(ARCHES) New MCAT
Tuesday February 28, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
ARCHES

7:00am

(DEER VALLEY) VSAS & GHLO
Tuesday February 28, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
DEER VALLEY

7:00am

(SNOWBIRD) FIRST
Tuesday February 28, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
SNOWBIRD

7:00am

(SUNDANCE) Careers in Medicine
Tuesday February 28, 2017 7:00am - 7:50am
SUNDANCE

7:00am

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) BREAKFAST (included in registration fee)
sliced seasonal fruit with berries
stawberry yogurt dip
breakfast pastries
bagels, butter, cream cheese 

Tuesday February 28, 2017 7:00am - 8:00am
CANYONS AND BRYCE

8:00am

(CANYONS AND BRYCE) Plenary Speaker Lorris Betz
Speakers
avatar for Lorris Betz, M.D.

Lorris Betz, M.D.

Senior Vice President Emeritus of Health Sciences, University of Utah
Dr. A. Lorris Betz received his B.S. degree in chemistry in 1969 and M.D. and Ph.D. (biochemistry and physiology) degrees in 1975 from the University of Wisconsin.  Dr. Betz spent the next four years at the University of California, San Francisco, completing his pediatric residency and a research fellowship in pediatric neurology.  He joined the faculty at the University of Michigan in the Departments of Pediatrics and Neurology in 1979... Read More →



Tuesday February 28, 2017 8:00am - 9:00am
CANYONS AND BRYCE

9:15am

(ARCHES) Developing a Value-Driven Healthcare Curriculum for Learners
Abstract Body: Objectives: Upon completion of this workshop, participants will be able to: 1. Describe a general needs assessment for a value-driven healthcare curriculum for medical students and residents, citing information from key organizations involved in undergraduate and graduate medical education. 2. Identify educational strategies, with a focus on experiential learning opportunities, which can be incorporated into a value-driven healthcare curriculum. 3. Identify potential barriers to implementation of a value-driven healthcare curriculum and strategies to address those barriers. Methods: We propose an interactive workshop in which participants will develop their knowledge base about and ability to design and implement a value-driven healthcare curriculum for their learners. The conceptual framework used to inform the structure of this workshop is Kern’s Six Steps for Curriculum Development; each of these six steps will be addressed, with the majority of the session focused on developing educational strategies and implementation planning. Interactive small and large group discussions will be employed to engage participants in active learning throughout the session. The session will begin with a brief review of the AAMC Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency and ACGME Core Competencies that inform the general need to provide value-driven healthcare curricula for trainees. The targeted needs assessment conducted by education leaders at the University of Utah will be reviewed as an example, providing an outline that participants can translate to their own institution. Basic learning goals for a value-driven healthcare curriculum will be reviewed, utilizing the value equation (Value = (Quality + Service) / Cost) and USMLE Content Outline to inform content. This background of general and targeted needs assessments and basic learning goals will set the stage for participants to develop educational strategies for a value-driven healthcare curriculum. Participants will work in small groups to identify and develop educational strategies that can be employed to meet the stated learning goals. Each group will report on their discussion in the large group setting. Opportunities for experiential learning will be highlighted and discussed. Finally, we will address anticipated barriers to implementation of the curriculum. Participants will brainstorm anticipated barriers, utilizing the Ishikawa Fishbone technique to structure the conversation and organize ideas into useful categories. The workshop will conclude with a brief summary of the session. Intended Outcomes: upon completion of the workshop, participants will be prepared to develop and implement a value-driven healthcare curriculum for their learners Target Audience: medical educators across the continuum, including both UME and GME 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
ARCHES

9:15am

(BRIGHTON) Moving beyond the steps: Enhancing procedural instruction with Applied Cognitive Task Analysis
Abstract Body: Introduction: Development of procedural competency is a critical component of resident education. Procedural competency consists of both the technical and cognitive skills (e.g. situational awareness and problem-solving abilities) needed to perform the procedure. Instruction in procedures tends to emphasize the technical steps; however effective instruction requires faculty to move beyond the behavioral elements and teach critical cognitive skills. Experts struggle to explain cognitive concepts and behavioral tasks because these skills become automated and are performed unconsciously. Applied Cognitive Task Analysis (ACTA) is a formal technique that can be particularly helpful in clarifying cognitive and behavioral processes in a systematic way. At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to: Objectives and outcomes: 1. Describe how expert task automation impacts procedural education. 2. Describe how differences in novice and expert perspectives affect procedural instruction. 3. Use Applied Cognitive Task Analysis to identify behavioral and cognitive tasks required to perform a specific medical procedure. 4. Describe how the use of Applied Cognitive Task Analysis can impact instruction of procedures. Methods: This workshop reviews challenges in procedural instruction and introduces attendees to Applied Cognitive Task Analysis (ACTA). The workshop will begin with a demonstration of how expertise can impact task instruction using origami as an exemplar. Following the demonstration, the presenters will engage the audience in a large group ACTA using lane switching as an example. Participants will then breakout into small groups of 6-8 where they will complete ACTA on a medical procedure with facilitators guiding the discussion. The participants will return to the large group to reflect on their ACTA experience and discuss how ACTA could impact their instruction of procedures. Participants will receive a handout with bibliographic references and resources for how to incorporate ACTA into curricular design. Target Audience: Residents, fellows, and faculty interested in procedural education 

Speakers
S

Shruti

Assistant professor, UCSF
I am an associate fellowship director for pediatric emergency medicine. I have an interest in procedural education, evaluations using milestones and simulation.


Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
BRIGHTON

9:15am

(DEER VALLEY) Self-directed learning, peer-to-peer teaching and scientific integration: digital tools to enhance histology
We will demonstrate a histology teaching App during this workshop. Whether or not you plan to attend, if you have an iPad and would like to examine a beta version of this App, send an email to rick.ash@utah.edu with the Subject: Histology App. You will receive an invitation from Apple’s TestFlight program with instructions.

Abstract Body: The launch of an integrated curriculum and a 50% increase in class size prompted the need to revise our approach to teaching histology. We also wanted to promote more self-directed learning and peer-to-peer teaching. To address these issues, over the past eight years we have created three types of digital learning tools: 1. Online lab guides that provide detailed text, micrographs, and links to virtual slides, permitting students to learn a large amount of the material on their own. 2. Group assignments that include standard microanatomy identifications, as well as functional questions gathered from many disciplines, such as gross anatomy, physiology, clinical medicine, and pathology, reinforcing our integrated curriculum. These assignments foster teamwork and peer-to-peer teaching since students in a group share the scores on assignments. 3. Histo!, an iPad app that allows students to learn and then test their knowledge at their own pace, individually or in groups. As with our assignments, Histo! includes structural and functional questions and includes topics beyond histology. Due to its high quality images, learning and test modes, and portability, Histo! is extremely popular with our students. Objectives. Participants will observe and then directly experience how: ● laboratory guides are constructed to facilitate self-directed learning. ● in-class group assignments encourage teamwork and reinforce learning. ● the Histo! app facilitates initial learning, review, and self-testing. Methods. The presenters will initially demonstrate features of the lab guides, assignments, and Histo! app to everyone. We will then break into groups to explore these three tools using iPads. A limited number of iPads will be provided, but attendees who own iPads are encouraged to bring them to download a beta version of the Histo! app. At the end of the session we will reconvene to solicit suggestions and feedback. Intended Outcomes. Participants will get hands-on experience with some simple and effective tools for managing a large laboratory session with limited faculty. They will see the potential and flexibility that the lab guides, assignments, and Histo! app provide for team work, self-directed learning, reinforcement of content and self-assessment. We anticipate that the workshop attendees will provide insights and suggestions for improving these tools and extending them to other subjects. Target Audience. Faculty involved in foundational science instruction. Although the focus here is on laboratory teaching, these tools are useful in other settings. 

Speakers
avatar for Rick Ash

Rick Ash

Professor, Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy, University of Utah
avatar for Sheryl Scott

Sheryl Scott

Professor, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy



Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
DEER VALLEY

9:15am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) An Interdisciplinary Team Model for Maximizing Student Success: A New Direction in Student Affairs
Abstract Body: Objectives: Identify unique student needs and systems issues that emerge from a mission driven, holistic admissions process and that impact the academic and professional growth of diverse learners. Describe an interdisciplinary model of student support designed to promote success and wellness of a diverse student body. Use cases to apply principles of interdisciplinary student support model and identify strengths and limitations of this model. At the University of California Davis School of Medicine (UCDSOM), the implementation of a mission driven holistic admissions process has significantly increased the diversity of the student body not only in the areas of race, ethnicity and gender, but also socioeconomic status, perspective and life experience. In addition to diversity, our student body brings unique and complex support needs that have challenged UCDSOM to develop a comprehensive, interdisciplinary model for student support. This approach brings together a Student Affairs Team (SAT) that includes the Office of Student Wellness, Office of Student Learning and Educational Resources, Office of Student and Resident Diversity, Career and Specialty Advising, Office of Curricular Support, and Student Support Services (e.g. financial aid, registrar). The Team meets bi-weekly to review systemic issues that impact student progress globally as well as individual student challenges with the goal of developing plans to maximize student success. This workshop will provide a brief overview of the range of student needs and system issues seen at UCDSOM since the implementation of a holistic mission driven admissions process. Each office will describe its role on the SAT and their contribution to this model of student support. Using case examples, participants will have the opportunity to identify student needs and apply the collaborative, interdisciplinary process through which the SAT examines student issues to develop plans for individual students to promote student success and well-being. Session participants will be encouraged to compare the UCDSOM approach to that used at their institution and reflect on strengths and limitations of this model. The goal is to promote and interactive dialogue about how student affairs can adapt to meet the needs of a changing student population and identify the skills needed to implement the model. 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

9:15am

(SIDEWINDER) Inclusion in Admissions: Comprehensive holistic review training in the admissions process
Abstract Body: Objectives To lead participants in an interactive holistic review training To discuss different admissions metrics and criteria, and the importance of these in reviewing medical school applicants To analyze what an ideal medical school application contains and how to provide admissions committees with the tools necessary to identify these applicants To define what a holistic review process means and its’ importance in the medical school admissions process Methods In this workshop, participants will actively engage in an abridged version of the Holistic Review Training developed by UNR Med for their Admissions Executive Committee. This training will begin with an overview of the context of a holistic review process within medical education and some sample institutions’ methods for facilitating their holistic admissions processes. We will then explore our own motivations for creating this training and how it fits in with the mission of our institution. Participants will then be exposed to a short overview of implicit bias and how it relates to a holistic review process. At this point, we will begin an applicant review activity where workshop participants review and rank sample medical school applications while being “blinded” to certain metrics and information. Further information will be provided about the applicants and then participants are asked to re-rank the applications. Finally, we will provide a summary of how each applicant performed in medical school, and ask participants to compare and contrast their rank lists with corresponding medical school performance metrics. This activity will lead into a discussion on the topics of an “ideal candidate” for medical school based on mission driven criteria, the tools and documents that can facilitate holistic review training, and considerations for how to bring this training to an Admissions Committee effectively. Intended Outcomes Participants will walk-away with a working definition of holistic review that can be applied to their own admissions process Participants’ view of traditional applicant criteria will be challenged and/or altered to further integrate inclusion in the admissions process Participants will understand potential methods of delivery for a holistic review training Target Audience This workshop is appropriate for any Student Affairs professionals interested in holistic review processes within medical education. Those working directly with admissions committees will find the content very relevant to their work. Participants should be prepared for an engaged, interactive session that will depend on audience participation in the activity and discussion. 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
SIDEWINDER

9:15am

(SNOWBIRD) The Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators: A Tool for Making the Pitch for Resources Needed to Preserve and Innovate the Educational Mission.
Abstract Body: Workshop Topic and Rationale: This workshop is an initiative of the Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) section of the Group on Educational Affairs (GEA) and the Group on Business Affairs (GBA). UME programs are faced with the ubiquitous challenge of repeated calls for innovation in medical education.1-2 Unfortunately these calls do not adequately address the associated resource demands.3-4 As we strive for integration and individualization, we face increased staffing demands and find ourselves developing new organizational structures to centralize educational support. More and more, there is a need to financially support our faculty members actively engaged in curricular design, delivery and assessment.5 The UME and GBA sections have modified the Business Model Canvas6 to create a shared language among medical educators. This shared language will lead to better strategic conversations, innovative curriculum ideas, and more structured, practical outcomes to implement. The information obtained from workshops at each of the GEA regional meetings will contribute to our national discussion on this important topic and also introduce participants to an effective model for educators to use in making the pitch for the necessary resources to preserve and innovate the educational mission. Learning Objectives: 1) Describe how the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators can help organizations conduct structured, tangible, and strategic conversations around new ideas or existing ones. 2) Apply the Business Model Canvas to design an educational activity to pitch to senior administration for the resources required to carry out the activity. 3) Generate ideas for bridging the gap between the Business Model Canvas and the execution of the model. Session Plan: We propose to train our workshop participants in the use of the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators to help them develop support for innovating and improving educational activities at their institution. Participants will review examples of a completed Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators then use a blank template to design an educational activity. Time will also be allocated for generating ideas on how to transform the plan into action. Overview of the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators. Presenters will provide training in the nine areas of the model: 1) value proposition, 2) customer segments, 3) customer relationships, 4) key activities, 5) delivery logistics, 6) key resources, 7) key partners, 8) revenue streams, and 9) cost structure. (30 minutes) Participants will work in small groups to identify a single project for the table then use the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators to develop a plan for communicating resource needs to senior administration. (45 minutes) Participants will report out to the large group their discussion and ideas from the team work, including how to transform the plan into action. (15 minutes) Presenters: Preetha Basaviah, MD, Assistant Dean of Preclerkship Education, Stanford School of Medicine Amy Waer, MD, Associate Dean for Medical Student Education, University of Arizona College of Medicine Abstract: Many medical schools are grappling with how to best utilize the limited resources available to support their core educational program as well as develop and / or sustain curricular innovations. This workshop will showcase how the Business Model Canvas for Medical Educators can be used to develop and communicate a proposal for supporting curriculum innovations and the core educational program. Participants can use the information gleaned from this workshop to develop their own plan of action. References (available upon request) American Medical Association. Accelerating change in medical education: Creating the medical school of the future. Published 2015. Accessed November 25, 2015. 



Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
SNOWBIRD

9:15am

(SUNDANCE) Engaging “Womb-to-Work” Digital Learners: Utilizing Technology to Activate Team-Based Learning
Abstract Body: Purpose: In this age of learning distractions and information overload, it has become increasingly difficult to design learning encounters that accomplish teaching goals while at the same time keeping the learners engaged. Your learners already have their phones and tablets out while you’re talking…they might as well use them to learn. Active learning is the practice of engaging the learner in their own learning, thus following the principles of adult learning theory. Unlike the time-honored lecture format, in which the educator’s job is to decipher the material and then reproduce it in sizeable chunks for the learners to understand, in an active learning model, the educator instead facilitates the learning process, focusing the responsibility of learning on the learners. As more physicians of the digital generation join the workforce, the ability to design and utilize active learning techniques and technology-based interventions will help cement learner knowledge and skills. Objectives: 1) Identify the principles of adult learning theory and how these principles are supported by active learning models and team-based learning approaches 2) Describe the differences between traditional learners and digital learners and identify how active learning models support digital student attributes 3) Discuss the advantages and limitations of active learning and team-based learning models 4) Explore how combining technology-based learning tools with team-based learning can be utilized for a variety of educational settings: from basic science to clinical rotations to critical appraisal of medical evidence to community/advocacy rotations Methods: This workshop will focus upon the use of an active learning model that encourages students to create, communicate, and collaborate utilizing mobile technology combined with team-based learning techniques. The workshop will begin with a brief overview of adult learning theory and how active and team-based learning supports these principles. Participants will then discuss the benefits and limitations of active and team-based learning models, and will be introduced to a variety of mobile learning technologies (online apps, software, and other digital learning adjuncts) that can be utilized to engage the learner, further dividing into small groups (or “teams”) to practice how to incorporate active learning into a variety of didactic sessions. The workshop will close with active learning team presentations developed during this workshop and a summary of “active learning pearls”. Intended Outcomes: 1) Participants will identify various ways in which mobile technology can be utilized to engage the digital learner in team-based learning activities 2) Participants will create a team-based learning activity that utilizes mobile technology in the learning process Target Audience: Students, residents, fellows, and faculty interested in innovative methods in educational curriculum design and instruction 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 9:15am - 10:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

(SIDEWINDER) Residency Application 2 - Learner Services
What is the student experience with the residency application process? The Learner Services team at the AAMC is engaging in discovery with students and trainees to understand their pain points, milestones, information sources and factors of success. This session will share our findings to date, and ask partcipants to explore key topics related to the student experience of the residency application process. Students and trainees are encouraged to attend.

Speakers
LA

Leonor Alfonso

Learner Engagement Manager, AAMC


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SIDEWINDER

11:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 1. Show Me Your Objectives: Nutrition Education in the University of New Mexico School of Medicine Curriculum, 2015-2016
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM

Show Me Your Objectives: Nutrition Education in the University of New Mexico School of Medicine Curriculum, 2015-2016

A. Robinson, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque
Abstract Body: Introduction: More than 2/3 of adults and 1/3 of children in the United States are overweight or obese which contributes to a vast array of adverse health outcomes. The population of New Mexico has been significantly impacted by this trend. Medical educators have been called upon to respond to these trends by improving nutrition education in undergraduate medical education. Course objectives provide the gold standard for documenting course content. The first step in creating a foundation for conversation regarding the optimal content and timing of nutrition curriculum is to identify the content and location within the existing curriculum. Key stakeholders at our institution expressed interest in this process prior to creation of this study, because no one had ever systematically assessed the content of our curriculum through the lens of nutrition education. Dialogue regarding the study findings is ongoing. Other United States medical schools may wish to utilize a similar process to evaluate nutrition education within their undergraduate curriculum to provide a foundation for conversation on improving their curriculum. Research questions: The goal of this project was to survey the content of the Phase I and Phase II course objectives within our undergraduate medical education program in an attempt to determine to what extent and within which courses our program provides foundational material on nutrition. A secondary question emerged during the research process: was there material on nutrition education presented within courses that may not be captured through survey of course objectives? Methods: A data collection instrument was designed based upon the list in "Nutrition Competencies for Graduating Medical Students" from the Nutrition in Medicine Program at the University of North Carolina. 61 subtopics were examined within 6 major categories. Course objectives of all first and second year required courses from 7/1/15 through 6/30/16 were surveyed. Thus, course objectives for 21 major blocks and clerkships and 5 additional courses were surveyed in our curriculum management program, One45. Following this survey, there was communication with the block chair or clerkship director from each course to discuss and verify the data.This was a mixed-methods study. Results: 17/26 (65%) of the courses surveyed included course content in at least one nutrition subtopic. "Water and electrolytes" and "Sources, bioavailability, action, deficiency, excess of micronutrients" were the subtopics most frequently covered within Foundational Topics, each addressed in five courses.Additionally, contact with course directors provided significantly more detail on course objecives within 4/17 (24%) of these courses. Discussion: There was more variability than anticipated in terms of identifying course objectives. We have opportunities for improvement in the quality of documentation of objectives and depth of curriculum content in nutrition education.This may facilitate communication between course directors to reduce redundant curriculum and elucidate gaps. The data collection was complicated by the level of detail in the survey tool. Variability of results was likely minimized by the fact that a single researcher was applying the same tool to each course with an identical approach. Other broad questions emerged from this study: should nutrition education be implemented as a longitudinal curriculum throughout our four year medical school program? Precisely what do we categorize as nutrition education from the standpoint of quantifying the number of hours of nutrition education that is provided to our learners?  

Speakers

Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
ARCHES

11:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 2. Where to begin: Developing a comprehensive sexuality curriculum
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM

Where to begin: Developing a comprehensive sexuality curriculum

B. Austin, P. Basaviah, B. Herman, D. Matsuda, M. Bryant, Stanford School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context As an integral member of the healthcare team, patients expect that medical students will have the training and expertise related to their healthcare inclusive of sexual health and activities. To address this theme, the curriculum oversight committee at our institution established the Sexuality, Sexual Function and Gender curriculum working group. The group was tasked with with updating our Stanford curriculum to be on the forefront of national and regional standards. The workgroup conducted a thorough review of the current Stanford curriculum, as well as those across the nation, leading to the development of new learning objectives and specific recommendations for an integrated thread of topics on Sexuality, Gender and Sexual Function to be addressed across the medical school continuum. The group identified the following areas of focus for the new curriculum: Respectful, sensitive communication with patients and colleagues Identification of sexuality issues across all medical disciplines (sexual orientation, identity, age, function and quality of life) Sensitivity in case development, i.e., including LGBTQI populations as part of cases centered on common medical conditions, such as hypertension; and, conversely, avoiding stereotypes (e.g., avoiding a gay male stereotype in HIV-related cases) Transgender health issues Sexuality issues in geriatric populations Consideration of a name change for the HHD Women’s Health block, where many sexuality-related topics related to all genders are currently focused Objectives Describe a framework for development of a comprehensive curriculum on sexuality, sexual function and gender. Describe one approach to integrating AAMC objectives into institution-specific objectives and curricular modalities Share established institutional benchmarks Explain the importance of involving key stakeholders that represent the diversity of expertise on this topic (including faculty, students, medical education staff, deans, etc.) Discuss successes, challenges and barriers in establishing curriculum Key Message and Conclusion This is one example of one institution's experience in implementing curricular change with regards to sexuality, sexual function and gender. Establishing a comprehensive sexuality curriculum is a multi-faceted, team effort and there are opportunities across the region to collaborate on best practices in diversifying curriculum and provide strategies for success.


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
ARCHES

11:00am

ARCHES - [Oral Presentation] 3. Culinary Medicine: Teaching Medical Students about Nutrition Through Hands-on Application
11:30 AM - 11:45 AM

Culinary Medicine: Teaching Medical Students about Nutrition Through Hands-on Application

C. Diamant, Z. Memel, E. Clarke, G. Harlan, Keck School of Medicine of USC
S. Chou, Nutrition, LA Kitchen, Los Angeles, California
 Abstract Body: The Institute of Medicine recommends that every medical school integrate a minimum of 25 hours of nutrition into their curriculum. In 2014, however, the University of North Carolina surveyed every US medical school and found that only 29% of schools provide the recommended 25 hours of nutrition education. In 2016 we conducted a needs based assessment of the nutrition attitudes and knowledge of Keck medical students and found that 83% of students were not satisfied with the quantity and quality of nutrition education at Keck. This translates into deficiencies in lifestyle promotion training with only 55% of surveyed students having ever counseled a patient on lifestyle recommendations and 64% of surveyed students not feeling confident to discuss dietary interventions with patients. In addition, only half of students reported eating at least three fruits or vegetables each day. In response to these findings, the Culinary Medicine selective was created as part of our Introduction to Clinical Medicine-Professionalism (ICM-P) course to address the need for more nutrition education, lifestyle promotion training, and community-based partnerships at the Keck School of Medicine. By utilizing hands-on culinary classes, we aim to educate students on their own healthy nutrition choices and improve their knowledge to pass along to patients. Nutrition education is essential to help future doctors learn how to integrate preventative practices and the appropriate sources of referral into their practice to maximize patient care. Course Objectives: 1. Respond to lack of nutrition curriculum after conducting a needs based assessment 2. Create a team-oriented, interdisciplinary course incorporating dietetics, culinary skills, and patient education 3. Fulfill LCME requirement to integrate lifestyle promotion skills into school curriculum 4. Create a sustainable course that honors USC’s long standing tradition of community partnership with a non-profit organization Key Message: The Culinary Medicine ICM-P Selective aims to prepare future physicians to serve, heal, and empower patients and communities through a curriculum that incorporates culinary skill and preventative medicine. In order to engage with the local community, Keck School of Medicine partnered with LA Kitchen, a local non-profit organization that distributes healthy meals to the elderly and provides free culinary training and job placement to people recently released from incarceration or foster care. In collaboration with LA Kitchen, medical students practice culinary techniques as they learn about the specific dietary options to treat common diseases. With this knowledge, students can counsel patients on how to create low-cost, healthy meals on a budget. Honoring the courses’ interdisciplinary theme, each class focuses on a specific disease (hypertension, diabetes, heart disease) taught from three different approaches: medical perspective (clinical case discussions), nutrition perspective (discussing appropriate diets with each morbidity), and culinary perspective (preparing a meal applying the nutrition lessons just learned). We also include a chef-guided trip to a grocery store, a session with several community partner organizations, and a final “team cook-off” session, in which each team prepares a nutritious meal targeted for a specific illness on a limited budget. In order to measure the impact of this course on students’ nutrition and culinary knowledge, a pre-course survey was completed and a post survey will also be administered. We anticipate that the survey results will demonstrate how a hands-on nutrition course can effectively improve students’ confidence in lifestyle counseling, nutrition knowledge, and personal culinary skills. Conclusion: Implementing a hands-on, community-based nutrition course provides students with a collaborative approach for promoting their personal health and dietary habits while simultaneously enhancing their confidence and knowledge needed to apply nutrition interventions in the clinical setting. 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
ARCHES

11:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 1. Applying lessons from the MD curriculum to the 1st-year PhD Bioscience curriculum at the University of Utah
11:00 AM - 11:15 AM

Applying lessons from the MD curriculum to the 1st-year PhD Bioscience curriculum at the University of Utah

M. Kay, University of Utah
Abstract Body: Context: Over the past seven years, the foundational science curriculum for medical students at the University of Utah (UU) has evolved to become more integrated, with a focus on developing the competencies of knowledge application, teamwork and self-directed learning. By contrast, the Bioscience PhD Programs in Molecular Biology and Biological Chemistry, 1st-year umbrella programs that serve multiple departments in the School of Medicine, College of Pharmacy, and College of Science, continued to have a discipline-based, lecture-heavy curriculum. However, it became apparent that many of our graduate students were not being adequately prepared to succeed on their oral preliminary exams, to be competitive for NIH and NSF training grants, and to graduate within about 6 years. Objectives: 1. Develop a new PhD curriculum that is more focused on critical evaluation of primary research literature, problem solving, hypothesis generation, and small-group learning. 2. Create new courses in critical thinking and literature review, as well as guided research proposal preparation. 3. Utilize active small group learning with faculty and senior graduate student facilitators modeled on successful case-based learning techniques pioneered in the MD curriculum. 4. Provide more time for the new courses by condensing the foundational curriculum and encouraging course leaders to introduce more active learning into their lecture-based courses. 5. Implement an end-of-year capstone exam in which students present and defend the original research proposal produced in class to an independent faculty panel not involved in the courses. For most departments, this capstone exam will replace the previous preliminary exam on a topic unrelated to their thesis taken in the second or third year. Key message: Actively involving foundational science researchers in the medical student curriculum can have unexpected benefits. Science faculty who have participated as case-based learning facilitators with medical students and witnessed the benefits of peer-teaching are more likely to support the adoption of student-centered, active learning strategies. The capstone exam was beta-tested last year as a non-binding exam, and the results helped to refine our strategy for this year's official launch. Conclusion: The UU Bioscience PhD program has just undergone a significant curriculum revision designed to help students achieve the competencies expected of independent scientists. Current efforts are focused on evaluating the effectiveness of these changes, providing support to instructors, and mentoring a new generation of faculty to make the new curriculum self sustaining. The medical school curriculum revisions helped inspire these changes. How might the strengths of PhD programs be used to improve medical education? 

Speakers

Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

SUNDANCE - [Oral Presentation] 2. Conceptual Frameworks: an Old Idea Helps Students Learn Cutting Edge Biomedical Science
11:15 AM - 11:30 AM

Conceptual Frameworks: an Old Idea Helps Students Learn Cutting Edge Biomedical Science 

J. Lindsley, T. Formosa, M.K. Tophman, University of Utah School of Medicine
Abstract Body: Context: First year Medical students have diverse backgrounds, making it challenging to effectively deliver introductory content in a broad range of topic areas. The traditional lecture format allows a large amount of material to be covered quickly, but this mode of delivery can encourage memorization without comprehension, resulting in poor retention. In order to address this problem for a first year medical student (MS1) course on Hematology and Cancer Biology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, we adopted David Ausubel's approach of starting each section of new material by providing an intellectual framework (which he called an Advance Organizer1) to help students appropriately structure ideas and facts. Objective: Our objective was to regularly provide a framework for students to help explain, integrate and interrelate upcoming material with content and ideas that they had previously learned. As course directors we sought to retain the value of having content experts deliver their scientific and clinical perspectives on complex topics while neither overwhelming the students nor requiring excessive dilution of the material. Key message: Providing a framework lecture at the beginning of each week of instruction has been an effective and very popular approach for structuring our integrated MS1 course. The course was organized into themes for each week ("leukemia" or "breast cancer" for example) and each framework session gave basic background on that topic and anticipated the content to be covered. Potential areas of difficulty were identified, and overarching principles of organization were explicitly provided. The general goal of these frameworks was to allow students to see the overall organization of the weekly theme so that they could securely distinguish the core concepts from the supporting details while the material was being presented. Further, a summary lecture was provided at the end of the week to help students assimilate problematic topics and resolve conflicting ideas or the different levels of emphasis provided by some experts with the level of mastery expected by the course directors. Conclusion: The framework format coupled with a summary session allowed students to extract more value from standard lectures as the intellectual structure for the topic was already in place, providing enhanced comprehension, less reliance on memorization, and greater long-term retention of core ideas. 1. Ausubel, D.P., The Use of Advance Organizers in the Learning and Retention of Meaningful Verbal Material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1960. 51(5): p. 267-272. 



Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SUNDANCE

11:00am

(BRIGHTON) Teaching Patient-Centered Time Management: Using findings from student logs to create meaningful curricular reform
Abstract Body: Learning objectives: Become familiar with medical student insights into benefits of and challenges to patient-centered care in primary care settings. Discuss time management, a salient patient-centered challenefor medical students. Explore ways to teach medical students about patient-centered time management through a hands-on curriculum. Generate ideas about additional ways to teach medical students about patient-centered care in busy outpatient settings. Methods: In 2013-2014, we conducted a study analyzing 216 medical students’ patient logs from the Stanford School of Medicine family medicine core clerkship to assess their perceptions of patient-centered care. We found that students were able to identify many of the benefits of patient-centered care, such as increased patient engagement in the care plan and improved outcomes. However, students also highlighted several challenges that they faced in being patient-centered. These challenges ranged from communication barriers between themselves and the patient, to limited time for the clinical encounter, to areas where physician and patient perceptions of illness differed. We have begun to design an innovative, hands-on curriculum that seeks to teach medical students new skills around patient-centeredness, to address some of these perceived challenges. Our evolving curriculum focuses on patient-centered time management. We designed a flipped classroom curriculum about patient-centered time management that includes two short video clips, followed by thirty minutes of didactics during the required family medicine core clerkship at Stanford. During our presentation, we will show audience members portions of the videos and use our curriculum as a starting point to generate discussion around how to teach medical students the tenets of patient-centered care, with a focus on time efficiency and efficacy. Intended outcomes: There is little in the literature about how to effectively teach students how to be patient-centered in a primary care setting. We hope to generate rich discussion about how to teach medical students the tenets of patient-centeredness, specifically in relation to time management. After we introduce the curriculum we have designed to teach students about patient-centered time management, we hope to get feedback from audience members about ways to improve/alter our curriculum to best address barriers to patient-centeredness in the primary care setting. Target audience: Our target audience includes primary care faculty, medical and other health professions students, and staff involved in designing and evaluating medical school education curriculum. We are especially hoping to target faculty and staff that help to design primary care exposure for preclerkship and clerkship students. 


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
BRIGHTON

11:00am

(DEER VALLEY) Coping and Responding to Medical Student Crises: Resources for the Medical School Community
Abstract Body: This small group discussion will focus on how schools respond to student tragedies on their campus. Participants will share their experiences in delaing with tragedies such as an unexpected death, how they responded and what they learned from the experience. The goal of this session is for participants to learn about effective strategies and resources that can be implemented at their own institutions. 



Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
DEER VALLEY

11:00am

(POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE) Providing Formative Feedback to Residents and Directors regarding Trainees' Performance of non-Medical Knowledge Competencies through a Shadow-shift/Evaluation by Non-Clinician Education Specialists
Abstract Body: Background This project represents an ongoing collaboarative effort of emergency medicine residency program directors, education professionals, and residents. The puprose was to enhance the quality and depth of formative feedback to residents regarding non-medical knowledge competencies. Effective communication skills are essential to building good patient rapport, communication and patient outcomes, as well as for successful collaborative working relations with peers, attendings and consulting physicians. Session Objectives The small group discussion of this process has the following objectives: - Describe the shadow shift/evaluation process for assessing and providing formative feedback to residents regarding performance of non-medical knowledge competencies. - Discuss results of the ongoing study - Discuss challenges raised by this process in terms of patient care, patient flow, resident and attending acceptance and cooperation; resident evaluation, evaluator competence, and inter-departmental collaboration. - Describe and discuss how project leaders addressed these challenges. The audience will their share perspectives on the issue of non-clinician evaluation of trainees, potential benefits and the challenges for design and implementation at their various institions. Evaluation Process Our resident shadow/evaluation project combines the skills, experience and talent of education professionals in the Office of Medical Student Education. The evaluation process has three components: 1) a full shadow shift by a non-clinician evaluator; 2) verbal feedback; and 3) written evaluation with specific feedback and guidance for improvement. Two medical education specialists shadow residents for an entire shift and note observations concerning interaction and communication with patients, peers, attendings and colleagues with whom they consult. At the close of the shift the education professional offers verbal feedback, and, within a couple of weeks following the shift, a written evaluation. Study Methods & Summary of Results We surveyed residents who participated in this evaluation process before and after the shadow shift experience. They identified anticipated and actual benefits and concerns associated with being evaluated by a non-clinician professional and being shadowed for an entire shift. Eight of nine residents in the post survey indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed they received meaningful feedback from the education professional, and that, “Overall, the education professional evaluated me accurately based on the milestones.” Only one resident indicated that the educational officials failed to identify specific skills and knowledge they needed to improve or guidance as to how to improve these. Only one was concerned that the education professional did not have sufficient knowledge of emergency medicine to identify skills and knowledge for improvement or offer guidance on how to improve. Small Group Discussion Methods Following a brief presentation of the evaluation approach and the results to date of the ongoing study of resident perceptions of the process, the facilitators will engage the participants in discussion and interactive activity as follows: - Discussion of challenges and strategies for addressing these with audience participation and suggestions; - Using a web-based collaboration tool, the audience participants will identify pros and cons as well as challenges/obstacles and supportive infrastructure at their own institutions for enhance trainee evaluation and formative feedback. Intended Outcomes Audience will demonstrate understanding of this evaluating process; describe key factors, possible challenges and strategies for designing and implementing an innovative evaluation process at their institutions. 

Speakers
avatar for Karen Spear Ellinwood

Karen Spear Ellinwood

Director, Instructional Development, University of Arizona College of Medicine
I develop curriculum for and conduct the annual residents as educators orientation, maintain the FID website (FID.medicine.arizona.edu) with original and culled resources for educators who teach medical students in clinical and non-clinical settings. Original works include a CME course providing guidance for giving constructive feedback, and a self-regulated course on formative feedback for residents as educators. In addition, I enjoy using and... Read More →


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
POWDER MOUNTAIN-SOLITUDE

11:00am

(SNOWBIRD) Curriculum Mapping: Love it or Hate It
Abstract Body: Curriculum mapping is integral to curriculum oversight, as well as required by the LCME. While every medical school is tasked with utilizing a clear and cohesive curriculum map, involving key stakeholders from day-one, defining a universal purpose, creating a realistic timeline, and planning effective messaging can ease the process. With limited financial resources, time, and staff to manage the creation of curriculum map, the challenge many medical administrators face is creating a curriculum map that will both fulfill all LCME requirements and serve as an attractive and useful tool for faculty and students for years to come. Gathering the elements of a curriculum map is a time consuming task, and can hold little relevance for educators who do not see the purpose or understand the usefulness of the final product. However, a well-designed curriculum map can serve many purposes, including aiding in administration of a cohesive curriculum, linking exam items to learning objectives, and categorizing content in a way that is relevant to educators across the continuum. During this small group presentation, we will: 1) Explain the elements of a curriculum map that can fulfill LCME requirements and serve as an organizational planning and collaboration tool. 2) Outline the process of creating a curriculum map, including faculty involvement, staffing requirements, technology requirements, faculty development, and continuous quality improvement. 3) Share lessons learned in creating a curriculum map. 4) Explain the role of assessments in curriculum mapping and share progress made at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Following the presentation, we will lead a small group discussion guided by question prompts. Attendees will examine the curriculum mapping processes currently in place at their institution and share their experiences with other small group participants. Before the end of the session, we will convene as a group to discuss central themes and create a final document of tips, lessons learned, and next steps to email to attendees after the presentation. At the end of the session, attendees should be able to: 1) Identify the components of a curriculum map and first steps needed to begin the mapping process at their institution. 2) Formulate a timeline for completing the curriculum mapping process in time for an LCME visit. 3) Connect with others involved in curriculum mapping. We hope that highlighting the multifaceted purposes of a curriculum map will appeal to curriculum deans, faculty, curriculum administrators, and support staff. 

Speakers
avatar for Michele Doucette

Michele Doucette

Assistant Dean of Integrated Curriculum, University of Colorado School of Medicine
I currently serve as the Assistant Dean of Integrated Curriculum for Undergraduate Medical Education at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Much of my current focus centers on managing, collecting, validating, and mapping course curricular elements for all four phases of the medical school curriculum. In addition, I oversee the day-to-day management and delivery of the Medical School curriculum.


Tuesday February 28, 2017 11:00am - 11:45am
SNOWBIRD