Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Blueprint for an Undergraduate Primary Care Curriculum

Fazio, Sara B. MD; Demasi, Monica MD; Farren, Erin; Frankl, Susan MD; Gottlieb, Barbara MD, MPH; Hoy, Jessica MD; Johnson, Amanda MD, MBA; Kasper, Jill MD; Lee, Patrick MD; McCarthy, Claire MD; Miller, Kathe MD; Morris, Juliana MD, EdM; O’Hare, Kitty MD; Rosales, Rachael; Simmons, Leigh MD; Smith, Benjamin MD; Treadway, Katherine MD; Goodell, Kristen MD; Ogur, Barbara MD

doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001302
Articles
Free
SDC

In light of the increasing demand for primary care services and the changing scope of health care, it is important to consider how the principles of primary care are taught in medical school. While the majority of schools have increased students’ exposure to primary care, they have not developed a standardized primary care curriculum for undergraduate medical education. In 2013, the authors convened a group of educators from primary care internal medicine, pediatrics, family medicine, and medicine–pediatrics, as well as five medical students to create a blueprint for a primary care curriculum that could be integrated into a longitudinal primary care experience spanning undergraduate medical education and delivered to all students regardless of their eventual career choice.

The authors organized this blueprint into three domains: care management, specific areas of content expertise, and understanding the role of primary care in the health care system. Within each domain, they described specific curriculum content, including longitudinality, generalism, central responsibility for managing care, therapeutic alliance/communication, approach to acute and chronic care, wellness and prevention, mental and behavioral health, systems improvement, interprofessional training, and population health, as well as competencies that all medical students should attain by graduation.

The proposed curriculum incorporates important core features of doctoring, which are often affirmed by all disciplines but owned by none. The authors argue that primary care educators are natural stewards of this curriculum content and can ensure that it complements and strengthens all aspects of undergraduate medical education.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

S.B. Fazio is associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

M. Demasi is instructor of population health (family medicine), Cambridge Health Alliance, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

E. Farren is education program director, Center for Primary Care, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

S. Frankl is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

B. Gottlieb is associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

J. Hoy is resident physician, Department of Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

A. Johnson is resident physician, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.

J. Kasper is instructor, Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

P. Lee is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Cambridge Health Alliance, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

C. McCarthy is assistant professor, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

K. Miller is assistant professor of population medicine (family medicine), Cambridge Health Alliance, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

J. Morris is resident physician, Department of Family & Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.

K. O’Hare is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

R. Rosales is a medical student, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

L. Simmons is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

B. Smith is resident physician, Fort Collins Family Medicine Residency, Fort Collins, Colorado.

K. Treadway is associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

K. Goodell is director for innovation in medical education (family medicine), Center for Primary Care, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

B. Ogur is associate professor of medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Cambridge Health Alliance, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding/Support: None reported.

Other disclosures: None reported.

Ethical approval: Reported as not applicable.

Supplemental digital content for this article is available at http://links.lww.com/ACADMED/A375.

Correspondence should be addressed to Sara B. Fazio, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, MA 02215; telephone: (617) 667-9600; e-mail: sfazio@bidmc.harvard.edu.

Primary care is the cornerstone of efficient and effective health systems, with its emphasis on prevention and the abundant evidence of its contribution to improved quality and lower costs of care. Ultimately, high-functioning primary care practices are based on the tenets of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Triple Aim—improving patients’ experience of care and the health of populations and reducing the per capita cost of health care.1 To this end, the focus of care has shifted recently to preventing disease rather than waiting to treat complications, and on coordinating care to improve quality and decrease the duplication of services. Expanded access to primary care in the wake of the Affordable Care Act should benefit our country, yet more than one group has predicted a significant shortage of primary care physicians.2,3 This shortage cannot simply be addressed by expanding enrollment in medical schools, as fewer than 25% of U.S. MD-granting and 31% of DO-granting medical school graduates plan to enter primary care.4,5 In addition, evidence suggests that graduate medical education training does not adequately prepare clinicians for many aspects of current primary care practice.6

In 1994, the Institute of Medicine defined primary care as “the provision of integrated, accessible health care services by clinicians who are accountable for addressing a large majority of personal health care needs, developing a sustained partnership with patients, and practicing in the context of family and community.”7 The major academic primary care organizations have called for the education of all physicians in the principles of patient-centered medical homes in a reformed health care delivery system.8 While many medical schools have implemented initiatives over the past two decades to increase students’ exposure to primary care, they have not agreed on objectives, outcomes, or assessment tools for undergraduate medical education in primary care, nor have they developed a standardized curriculum to address these needs. Instead, schools rely on individual disciplines to cover primary care topics, with variable emphasis and degrees of coordination.

The 21st century poses multiple challenges to our health care system and to health care providers. The epidemiology of illness has evolved from acute infections to chronic complex, multisystem diseases, and goals have shifted from curing disease to maximizing well-being. Non-primary-care physicians will need to understand the pivotal role of generalists in this system, as well as the importance of reforming their own practices to better coordinate with primary care physicians for optimal patient management.9

To meet these goals, we developed a blueprint for an undergraduate primary care curriculum at Harvard Medical School (HMS). In this article, we describe its development and content, including domains and competencies.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Overview of Developing a Primary Care Curriculum

As part of a major curriculum overhaul at HMS and in light of the recent publication of the Association of American Medical Colleges’ Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency,10 the education committee of the HMS Center for Primary Care invited leaders in primary-care-related courses at HMS to come together to define a “curriculum” in primary care that all our medical students would complete, regardless of whether they planned to pursue a career in a primary care discipline. These leaders represented all of the major teaching hospital systems and are authors of this article (see Supplemental Digital Appendix 1 at http://links.lww.com/ACADMED/A375 for a list of the authors and their educational roles at HMS).

We envisioned that this primary care curriculum would include two main components—a set of themes fundamental to primary care and a list of the most important clinical conditions in primary care practice with which every medical student should have experience. In addition, we planned to describe the key structural elements that would best enable students’ learning of this content, echoing the Donabedian model.11 Our goal was to develop a “blue sky” template for the key components of such a curriculum that would be generalizable to other institutions and would inform a set of competencies that all students should be expected to attain in their training. We understood that many of these core themes would be basic themes of doctoring—the tenets of the essential clinical transaction and of learning to create caring professional relationships.12 Indeed, a number of other disciplines have created curricula encompassing longitudinal care, acknowledging the importance of providing students with exposure to critical thinking, the patient’s experience, and the doctor–patient relationship over time.13–17 While many of these themes are important to all disciplines, they often are not owned in discipline-specific curricula, whereas they are the core of primary care.

At many medical schools, the elements of a curriculum in primary care are delivered as part of one or more discrete clinical courses. More institutions are beginning to expose students to primary care practice environments earlier in their training,18 and several are creating explicit tracks for training future primary care physicians.19–23 However, our approach is unique in that it is based on the knowledge and skills that every student needs to learn to be a competent physician, and it was developed as a competency-based, developmentally progressive four-year primary care curriculum experience.

Several operational features emerged as critical for a primary care curriculum. First, it should include the longitudinal integration of students into primary care practices beginning early in their training, to provide experiential grounding to the basic science curriculum, allow for enhanced clinical skills training and assessment, improve student satisfaction, and enable students to build a panel of patients whom they can follow over time.18,24 In addition, a primary care curriculum should span all four years of undergraduate medical education, providing all students with ongoing involvement in their patients’ experiences of illness. Finally, the curriculum should be developmentally progressive and targeted to students’ levels of interest, with foundational competencies for every student and expanded competencies for those intending to focus on a career in primary care.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Conceptual Approach to Developing a Primary Care Curriculum

In December 2013, we established a working group of 15 expert educators from HMS in the main primary care fields of practice, including primary care internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, and medicine–pediatrics, and 5 medical students. The team reviewed available literature from PubMed (2000 to present), curriculum offerings published in MedEdPORTAL, and available national undergraduate curricula from the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine, the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, the Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics, as well as from the Nova Scotia Primary Health Care Competency Framework and the World Health Organization 2011 Sexual and Reproductive Health Core Competencies.25–28 Each member of the team was asked to create a list of 10 content and experiential elements that should be covered in the new curriculum. We then compiled these lists into a grid. Over the course of monthly meetings in 2014, 11 core themes emerged. We excluded topics that were not specific to primary care education, including the demonstration of procedural competence, pharmacology of commonly prescribed medications, principles of evidence-based medicine, health care financing, and high-value care. End-of-life care also was excluded, as we felt that it went beyond the purview of a basic broad curriculum.

What emerged was a unique template for a four-year curriculum that defined three main domains of primary care curriculum content: care management, specific areas of content expertise, and understanding the key role of primary care in the health care system. Within each domain, we described specific curriculum content and associated competencies that all students should possess upon graduation from medical school. These competencies include common areas of primary care focus as well as foundational skills that all physicians should possess to practice in the health care system of the future.29

We describe in more detail this curriculum content by domain in the sections that follow and in Appendix 1.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

Care Management

1. Longitudinality

Central to the Institute of Medicine’s definition of primary care is the concept of a sustained relationship over time between a provider and patient.7 Most medical schools offer opportunities for students to interact with patients early in their education. Such opportunities have clear benefits—students are better able to link the basic sciences to clinical medicine, which allows them to become more confident in their clinical skills, inculcates their self-awareness, nurtures their development of a professional identity, and is more satisfying.30,31 However, a single patient interaction, generally limited to data gathering and the observation of a care episode, does not provide students with opportunities to witness the core longitudinal nature of primary care.

Exposure to patients over the full course of their illness is more valuable from an educational standpoint than opportunistic encounters with primarily acute care inpatients.32 Students must be involved with patients from the time of their initial presentation through the entirety of their illness episode to foster diagnostic reasoning skills.33 Such longitudinal contact allows students to get to know patients in the full context of their lives, families, and communities to understand the relevance of contextual factors to illness34 and to develop mutually trusting relationships, which are a cornerstone of effective practice. Longitudinal contact also provides unique opportunities for students to continuously improve their skills,35 to appreciate the process of specialty referral and collaboration, and to bear witness to systems gaps.

Back to Top | Article Outline

2. Generalism

The generalist is able to care for patients with undifferentiated illnesses and the widest range of conditions and consistently sees the patient as a whole person and in the context of his or her family and social environment.36 Primary care physicians are trained in the intellectual habit of considering all possible diagnostic etiologies, including all body systems and mental health disorders, before finalizing a diagnosis. These skills help physicians avoid premature closure and other diagnostic pitfalls. In addition, generalists must develop a certain degree of comfort with uncertainty, a crucial skill in the practice of medicine. When evaluating patients, students must learn to approach each encounter with a combination of medical knowledge, best available evidence, and an understanding of what will serve each patient’s particular needs.

Back to Top | Article Outline

3. Central responsibility for managing care

As the central coordinator of a patient’s care, the primary care physician must manage chronic illness, identify and coordinate preventive care, and take responsibility for care across many disease episodes as well as over time, often serving as the initial evaluator of acute undifferentiated illness and sometimes coordinating complex care across organizations. Students should learn how to diagnose and provide treatment for common illnesses without having to refer the patient to a specialist but also be able to integrate their care with that of a larger team of physicians when necessary.

Back to Top | Article Outline

4. Therapeutic alliance/communication

Good communication skills are crucial for relationship building, history taking, health education, motivating behavior change, and ensuring adherence to a treatment plan, all of which are key to the practice of medicine. Arguably, these skills are best taught in a primary care setting. A fundamental role of the primary care physician is to ensure communication and collaboration across the care team, as well as shared decision making with the patient and family. Skills to be mastered in this area include shared decision making and negotiation, relationship building, effective organization, and time management in deliver ing care.37,38 A basic understanding of general medical ethics skills, including maintaining confidentiality, obtaining informed consent, and truth telling, is also important.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Specific Areas of Content Expertise

5. Approach to acute care

The ability to provide acute or urgent care is an important skill in primary care. Primary care physicians are often the ones to see a patient with a new problem, and they must sort through all the diagnostic possibilities after completing a careful history and exam, using their knowledge of the patient. This common task requires that physicians are proficient in identifying the likely causes of illness prior to determining a diagnostic and treatment plan, and that they have the confidence to proceed in a stepwise fashion to avoid overuse of resources.36 In addition, a good primary care physician has the ability to triage sick from not-sick patients to determine the appropriate pace and venue for intervention. As in all specialties, some acute care symptoms and diseases are so common in the primary care setting that all students should be familiar with them prior to graduation (see Appendix 1 for a list of these symptoms and diseases).39

Back to Top | Article Outline

6. Approach to chronic care

Chronic disease is responsible for more than 50% of mortality worldwide, representing nearly 50% of the global burden of disease.40 All students must have a basic understanding of the physiology, range of expression and presentation, diagnosis, and management of common chronic illnesses by the time they graduate from medical school. Drawing from the national curricula in internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics,26–28 we determined which conditions are integral to the discipline of primary care and for which a coordinated knowledge about outpatient diagnosis and management is central to a physician’s ability to practice in a variety of settings (see Appendix 1). Upon graduation, students must be able to explicitly describe evidence-based and/or consensus-based goals for the treatment of each of these conditions.

While much of the focus of a chronic disease curriculum is on teaching disease-specific knowledge, all graduating students should also have a basic understanding of the tenets of the Chronic Care Model,40,41 which includes educating and supporting patients, improving provider expertise through decision support, creating care delivery that is planned and team based, using registry-based clinical information systems, focusing on the organization of health care, and understanding the role of community support. The Chronic Care Model shifts the approach to chronic illness from a reactive model to one that is proactive.40

Back to Top | Article Outline

7. Wellness and prevention

An undergraduate medical school curriculum should include preventative approaches to health care for patients at all stages of life.26,27 This begins with a working knowledge of child development and continues with an understanding of other prevention strategies that are applicable throughout an individual’s life, including the needs of geriatric patients. Students should understand the role that vaccines play in infectious disease control and be able to advise patients on their use. They also should be well versed in the risks and benefits associated with screening for conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and genetic disorders.42 Students need to be able to effectively counsel patients on the risk/benefit ratios of preventative interventions, their effects on outcomes, costs, and the sensitivity and specificity of a test in a given population. Students must demonstrate strong motivational interviewing skills and the ability to effectively counsel patients on the importance of lifestyle modification.

Back to Top | Article Outline

8. Mental and behavioral health

More than 18% of adults in the United States receive a mental health diagnosis.43 Most of these patients will receive treatment from a primary care provider rather than from a mental health specialist. Thus, medical students should learn how to evaluate patients with the most common mental illnesses as well as how to treat those conditions in the outpatient setting. Students also should be familiar with validated screening tools for depression, anxiety, autism spectrum disorders, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and understand differential presentations in pediatric, adult, and elderly patients. In addition, students should be able to assess patients for substance use disorders and be aware of the treatment options for the use of tobacco, alcohol, and opiates. Because of the strong correlation between exposure to violence and other adverse life events and mental and physical health outcomes, students must learn to screen for these exposures at all stages of life and be familiar with the resources available for patients who have had such experiences.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Understanding the Key Role of Primary Care in the Health Care System

9. Systems improvement

In an effort to transform systems of health care delivery to increase quality and reduce costs, the patient-centered medical home has become one of the defining primary care practice models of our generation. Current medical students likely will be exposed to practices either transitioning to patient-centered medical home models or implementing smaller-scale enhancements.44 Thus, they must appreciate how quality improvement methodologies are applied in the ambulatory setting with the aim of redesigning primary care to optimize outcomes for patients and populations.

Back to Top | Article Outline

10. Interprofessional training

Given the increasing complexity of health care delivery, volume of information, and number and type of health care providers, high-functioning teams are essential for delivering efficient, high-quality, patient-centered care. Although best practices in interprofessional education have not yet been clearly defined,45,46 an important way to address this educational need is to provide our students with experiences that allow them to learn and work with both trainee and practicing non-MD health professionals in a variety of settings.47 Because students adopt the characteristics of the culture in which they are trained, it is important to provide interprofessional experiences throughout their learning, starting early on in training.

Back to Top | Article Outline

11. Population health

Managing the health of a population, both in and out of the office, presents a different set of challenges and oppor tunities than the care of individuals in an inpatient or outpatient setting. Key elements for population health practice include knowledge of how a health system contributes to the health of individuals and populations, familiarity with methods to identify unmet population health needs and to track the impact of initiatives, and skills to effectively engage and collaborate with stakeholders to coproduce health.48,49 Principles of population health and health care delivery can be taught didactically, but they are best internalized when they are reinforced through experience. Several well-articulated frameworks exist for curricula in population health, as do the means for competency mapping, which educators should consider incorporating into this paradigm.50–52

Back to Top | Article Outline

The Need for Meaningful Reform

In 2010, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching called for the integration of formal learning with clinical experience in medical education, including early clinical immersion, longitudinal patient experiences, and interprofessional education, as well as for engaging learners in habits of inquiry that allow them to learn about population health, innovation, and improvement of care.53 We can envision no better setting than a high-functioning primary care practice in which to realize these goals.

We have broken these elements of formal learning into thematic components: care management, specific areas of content expertise, and understanding the role of primary care in the health care system. The expectation is that all graduating medical students should acquire a core set of knowledge and skills and that they will do so through an experiential framework that will anchor their learning in develop mental phases appropriate to the stage of their training. We envision that some of the basic principles may be taught in didactic portions of the curriculum, but the majority of the learning objectives are best reinforced and internalized in the clinical setting, preferably in a primary care clinical experience that spans the four years of undergraduate training. See Table 1 for specific examples of developmental competencies by stage of training that align with these domains and curriculum content.

Table 1

Table 1

Some might question why all of these domains should be required learning for a student who is pursuing a career as a subspecialist or physician–scientist. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 472 generalist physicians and 636 specialist physicians per 1 million people in the United States in 2010,54 and the Association of American Medical Colleges has called for expansion of the physician workforce across both these groups.55 However, the future of medicine likely will require the ability to practice in an integrated health system, and the primary care physician plays a central role in this construct. Berwick and Finkelstein56 have argued that system improvement skills must be taught to all medical students and that medical education must focus on patient-centeredness, transparency, and stewardship of limited resources. In addition, the Liaison Committee on Medical Education requires all medical schools to offer opportunities for service learning and interprofessional education as well as instruction in culturally competent care and health care disparities.57 Although each of these content elements could be learned in alternative settings, longitudinal clinical experiences cover them all. Having future specialists and generalists practice alongside one another in the later years of medical school also allows them all to learn the art of smooth referrals as well as the benefits of collaboration. Students with an interest in any discipline of clinical practice will benefit from a curriculum that spans all four years and focuses on such core skills of doctoring as the therapeutic relationship; working in multidisciplinary teams; and understanding social, psychological, and cultural factors to provide effective health care.

Our primary care curriculum proposal has a number of limitations. Principal among them is that it was developed at a single institution in the process of curriculum reform; thus, the ability to incorporate it into alternate settings may be challenging. Our first-year students already take part in a longitudinal primary care experience as part of their clinical skills development. In addition, the domains chosen for this template were not selected through the use of a predefined qualitative approach but, rather, through a series of iterative discussions among educators and students who were invested in the process. A key operative feature of the curriculum is a longitudinal experience superimposed upon (but not replacing) required curriculum elements, which may mitigate some of the difficulty that other institutions would face if they were to adopt our model.

A number of the curriculum elements we propose in this blueprint ultimately will require concurrent transformation in teaching practices to allow time and space for learners to take part in this longitudinal clinical experience, as well as a focused effort to foster faculty development. However, the investment is well worth the cost. As educators, we must provide our students, regardless of their career choice, with the best possible tools and experiences for understanding our health care system and the roles and responsibilities, intellectual demands, and expertise of those who function within it.

Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank Dr. Russell S. Phillips and Dr. Edward M. Hundert for their helpful guidance.

Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: Care, health, and cost. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27:759–769.
2. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q. 2005;83:457–502.
3. Atlas SJ, Grant RW, Ferris TG, Chang Y, Barry MJ. Patient–physician connectedness and quality of primary care. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:325–335.
4. Chen C, Petterson S, Phillips RL, Mullan F, Bazemore A, O’Donnell SD. Toward graduate medical education (GME) accountability: Measuring the outcomes of GME institutions. Acad Med. 2013;88:1267–1280.
5. American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. 2013–14 academic survey of graduating seniors summary report. 2014. http://www.aacom.org/docs/default-source/data-and-trends/2013-14-GSSSR.pdf?sfvrsn=6. Accessed May 23, 2016.
6. Jackson A, Baron RB, Jaeger J, Liebow M, Plews-Ogan M, Schwartz MD; Society of General Internal Medicine Health Policy Committee. Addressing the nation’s physician workforce needs: The Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) recommendations on graduate medical education reform. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29:1546–1551.
7. Donaldson M, Yordy K, Vanselow N, Defining Primary Care: An Interim Report. 1994. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; eds. http://www.nap.edu/read/9153/chapter/1. Accessed May 23, 2016.
8. Baxley EG, Dearing J, Esquivel M, et al. Joint principles for the medical education of physicians as preparation for practice in the patient-centered medical home. December 2010. https://www.acponline.org/system/files/documents/running_practice/delivery_and_payment_models/pcmh/understanding/educ-joint-principles.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2016.
9. Jones KB, Magill MK. Training physicians for a new health care delivery system. Acad Med. 2013;88:559.
10. Association of American Medical Colleges. Core entrustable professional activities for entering residency (updated). https://www.mededportal.org/icollaborative/resource/887. Accessed May 24, 2016.
11. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966. Milbank Q. 2005;83:691–729.
12. Barondess JA. The clinical transaction: Themes and descants. Perspect Biol Med. 1983;27:25–38.
13. Frattarelli LC, Kamemoto LE. Obstetrics and gynecology medical student outcomes: Longitudinal multispecialty clerkship versus traditional block rotations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:1800–1804.
14. Henry-Tillman R, Deloney LA, Savidge M, Graham CJ, Klimberg VS. The medical student as patient navigator as an approach to teaching empathy. Am J Surg. 2002;183:659–662.
15. Ghosh A, Hirsh DA, Ogur B, Schwaitzberg SD. Teaching medical students about cancer impact through a longitudinal surgical experience: A case study. Teach Learn Med. 2012;24:158–162.
16. Ogrinc G, Mutha S, Irby DM. Evidence for longitudinal ambulatory care rotations: A review of the literature. Acad Med. 2002;77:688–693.
17. Norris TE, Schaad DC, DeWitt D, Ogur B, Hunt DD; Consortium of Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships. Longitudinal integrated clerkships for medical students: An innovation adopted by medical schools in Australia, Canada, South Africa, and the United States. Acad Med. 2009;84:902–907.
18. Dornan T, Littlewood S, Margolis SA, Scherpbier A, Spencer J, Ypinazar V. How can experience in clinical and community settings contribute to early medical education? A BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2006;28:3–18.
19. Association of American Medical Colleges. A Snapshot of the New and Developing Medical Schools in the United States and Canada. 2012. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/A%20Snapshot%20of%20the%20New%20and%20Developing%20Medical%20Schools%20in%20the%20US%20and%20Canada.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2016.
20. Pipas CF, Peltier DA, Fall LH, et al. Collaborating to integrate curriculum in primary care medical education: Successes and challenges from three US medical schools. Fam Med. 2004;36(suppl):S126–S132.
21. Schauer RW, Schieve D. Performance of medical students in a nontraditional rural clinical program, 1998–99 through 2003–04. Acad Med. 2006;81:603–607.
22. Sheline B, Tran AN, Jackson J, Peyser B, Rogers S, Engle D. The primary care leadership track at the Duke University School of Medicine: Creating change agents to improve population health. Acad Med. 2014;89:1370–1374.
23. Carney PA, Pipas CF, Eliassen MS, et al. An analysis of students’ clinical experiences in an integrated primary care clerkship. Acad Med. 2002;77:681–687.
24. Julian K, Riegels NS, Baron RB. Perspective: Creating the next generation of general internists: A call for medical education reform. Acad Med. 2011;86:1443–1447.
25. World Health Organization. Sexual and Reproductive Health Core Competencies in Primary Care. 2011. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; https://www.k4health.org/toolkits/pse/sexual-and-reproductive-health-core-competencies-primary-care. Accessed May 23, 2016.
26. Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine. CDIM-SGIM Core Medicine Clerkship Curriculum Guide Pocket Guide Version 3.0. 2006. http://www.im.org/p/cm/ld/fid=657. Accessed May 24, 2016.
27. Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics. COMSEP curriculum revision 2005. https://www.comsep.org/curriculum/CurriculumCompetencies/pdf/web2005COMSEPCurricul.pdf. Accessed May 24, 2016.
28. Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. The family medicine clerkship curriculum. http://www.stfm.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=upiiuNFp3Vc%3D&tabid=17603&portalid=49. Accessed May 24, 2016.
29. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287:226–235.
30. Henschen BL, Garcia P, Jacobson B, et al. The patient centered medical home as curricular model: Perceived impact of the “education-centered medical home.” J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:1105–1109.
31. Wijnen-Meijer M, ten Cate O, van der Schaaf M, Harendza S. Graduates from vertically integrated curricula. Clin Teach. 2013;10:155–159.
32. Thistlethwaite JE, Bartle E, Chong AA, et al. A review of longitudinal community and hospital placements in medical education: BEME guide no. 26. Med Teach. 2013;35:e1340–e1364.
33. Hirsh DA, Ogur B, Thibault GE, Cox M. “Continuity” as an organizing principle for clinical education reform. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:858–866.
34. Weiner SJ, Schwartz A, Sharma G, et al. Patient-centered decision making and health care outcomes: An observational study. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:573–579.
35. Lin SY, Schillinger E, Irby DM. Value-added medical education: Engaging future doctors to transform health care delivery today. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30:150–151.
36. Royal College of General Practitioners. Medical Generalism: Why Expertise in Whole Person Medicine Matters. 2012.London, England: Royal College of General Practitioners.
37. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making—pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:780–781.
38. Yedidia MJ, Gillespie CC, Kachur E, et al. Effect of communications training on medical student performance. JAMA. 2003;290:1157–1165.
39. Ambulatory and Hospital Care Statistics Branch. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2011 outpatient department summary tables. 2011. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ahcd/nhamcs_outpatient/2011_opd_web_tables.pdf. Accessed May 24, 2016.
40. Coleman K, Austin BT, Brach C, Wagner EH. Evidence on the Chronic Care Model in the new millennium. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28:75–85.
41. Wagner EH, Austin BT, Von Korff M. Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. Milbank Q. 1996;74:511–544.
42. U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Recommendations for primary care practice. December 2013. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/recommendations. Accessed May 24, 2016.
43. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. Behavioral Health Trends in the United States: Results From the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. 2015.Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
44. Patient-Centered Primary Care Collaborative. The medical home’s impact on cost & quality: An annual update of the evidence, 2012–2013. 2014. https://www.pcpcc.org/resource/medical-homes-impact-cost-quality. Accessed May 24, 2016.
45. Mitchell P, Wynia M, Golden R, et al. Core Principles and Values of Effective Team-Based Health Care. 2012. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine; https://www.nationalahec.org/pdfs/vsrt-team-based-care-principles-values.pdf. Accessed May 24, 2016.
46. Reeves S, Perrier L, Goldman J, Freeth D, Zwarenstein M. Interprofessional education: Effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (update). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;3:CD002213.
47. Interprofessional Education Collaborative. Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice: Report of an Expert Panel. 2011. Washington, DC: Interprofessional Education Collaborative; https://nnlm.gov/bhic/2011/05/26/core-competencies-interprofessional/. Accessed May 24, 2016.
48. Boyle D, Harris M. The Challenge of Co-Production: How Equal Partnerships Between Professionals and the Public Are Crucial to Improving Public Services. 2009. London, England: NESTA; http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/the-challenge-of-co-production. Accessed May 24, 2016.
49. Ramírez R. Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strateg Manage J. 1999;20:49–65.
50. Association for Prevention Teaching and Research. Healthy People Curriculum Task Force. Clinical prevention and population health curriculum framework. 2015. http://www.teachpopulationhealth.org. Accessed May 24, 2016.
51. Allan J, Barwick TA, Cashman S, et al. Clinical prevention and population health: Curriculum framework for health professions. Am J Prev Med. 2004;27:471–476.
52. Kaprielian VS, Silberberg M, McDonald MA, et al. Teaching population health: A competency map approach to education. Acad Med. 2013;88:626–637.
53. Irby DM, Cooke M, O’Brien BC. Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: 1910 and 2010. Acad Med. 2010;85:220–227.
54. Hing E, Schappert SM. Generalist and specialty physicians: Supply and access, 2009–2010. NCHS Data Brief. September 2012;(105):1–8.
55. IHS Inc. The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections From 2013 to 2025. 2015. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; https://www.aamc.org/download/426242/data/ihsreportdownload.pdf?cm_mmc=AAMC-_-ScientificAffairs-_-PDF-_-ihsreport. Accessed May 24, 2016.
56. Berwick DM, Finkelstein JA. Preparing medical students for the continual improvement of health and health care: Abraham Flexner and the new “public interest.” Acad Med. 2010;85(9 suppl):S56–S65.
57. Liaison Committee on Medical Education. Functions and structure of a medical school: Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the MD degree. March 2016. http://lcme.org/publications/. Accessed May 24, 2016.
Back to Top | Article Outline

Reference cited in Appendix 1 only

58. Lenihan P, Iliffe S. Community-oriented primary care: A multidisciplinary community-oriented approach to primary care? J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2001;11:11–18.

Supplemental Digital Content

Back to Top | Article Outline
© 2016 by the Association of American Medical Colleges