The current state of physician leadership education consists mainly of executive degree programs designed for midcareer physicians. In 2004, the authors proposed that, by educating medical students in physician leadership and integrating this with a business management or public health degree program, graduates, health care organizations, and communities would benefit sooner. Given the lack of program models to guide program integration and development, the authors began a one-year inquiry to build a model leadership curriculum and integrate leadership education across degree programs. The qualitative inquiry resulted in several linked tasks. First, the authors identified a feasible method for concurrently delivering all three program components (MD degree, Leadership Curriculum, and MBA or MPH degree) during a five-year plan. Second, the authors chose a competency-based educational framework for leadership and then identified, adapted, and validated existing leadership competencies to their context. Third, the authors performed an extensive program alignment to identify existing overlaps and opportunities for integration within and across program components. Fourth, the authors performed a needs analysis to identify educational gaps, subsequently leading to redesigning two courses and to designing three new courses. A description of the Leadership Curriculum is also provided. This inquiry has led to the development of the Boonshoft Physician Leadership Development Program, which provides physician leadership education integrated with medical education and education in business management or public heath. Future program initiatives include developing leadership student assessment tools and testing the link between program activities and short- and long-term outcome measures of program success.

BackgroundOrganizational leaders in business and medicine have been experiencing a similar dilemma: how to ensure that their organizational members are adopting work innovations in a timely fashion. Organizational leaders in healthcare have attempted to resolve this dilemma by offering specific solutions, such as evidence-based medicine (EBM), but organizations are still not systematically adopting evidence-based practice innovations as rapidly as expected by policy-makers (the knowing-doing gap problem). Some business leaders have adopted a systems-based perspective, called the learning organization (LO), to address a similar dilemma. Three years ago, the Society of General Internal Medicine's Evidence-based Medicine Task Force began an inquiry to integrate the EBM and LO concepts into one model to address the knowing-doing gap problem.MethodsDuring the model development process, the authors searched several databases for relevant LO frameworks and their related concepts by using a broad search strategy. To identify the key LO frameworks and consolidate them into one model, the authors used consensus-based decision-making and a narrative thematic synthesis guided by several qualitative criteria. The authors subjected the model to external, independent review and improved upon its design with this feedback.ResultsThe authors found seven LO frameworks particularly relevant to evidence-based practice innovations in organizations. The authors describe their interpretations of these frameworks for healthcare organizations, the process they used to integrate the LO frameworks with EBM principles, and the resulting Evidence in the Learning Organization (ELO) model. They also provide a health organization scenario to illustrate ELO concepts in application.ConclusionThe authors intend, by sharing the LO frameworks and the ELO model, to help organizations identify their capacities to learn and share knowledge about evidence-based practice innovations. The ELO model will need further validation and improvement through its use in organizational settings and applied health services research.

This AMEE Guide provides an overview of medical education scholarship for early career scholars, based upon a summary of the existing literature and pragmatic advice derived from the experience of its authors. After providing an introduction to the principles of scholarship and describing questions that the Guide addresses, the authors offer a conceptual description of the complementary traditions of teaching and educational discovery, and advocate for the development of educational scholars with both traditions. They then describe the attributes of effective mentor-mentee relationships and how early career scholars can identify potential mentors who can fulfill this role. In the subsequent sections, they describe the appropriate development of scholarly questions and other components of a complete scholarly plan, including how to use conceptual frameworks in guiding such plans. From here, they describe methods that align with both the teaching and discovery traditions and provide concrete examples of each. They then provide guidelines for assessing the impact of scholarship, identify the various opportunities for sharing it, and how to effectively interpret and describe it. Additionally, they provide practical advice on how appropriately to demonstrate the scholarship in a promotional packet, including the principle of reflectivity in scholarship. Finally, they address the principles of applied research ethics for educational scholarship and when to consider soliciting approval for scholarly activities by a human research board.

Background: Practice management education continues to evolve, and little information exists regarding its curriculum design and effectiveness for resident education. We report the results of an exploratory study of a practice management curriculum for primary care residents.