Curricular Recommendations for a National Family Medicine Subinternship: A Qualitative Analysis From Multiple Stakeholders.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The 2011 Alliance for Clinical Education panel recommended the development of a specialty-specific curriculum for all subinternships (sub-Is). A 2019 CERA survey found that 58% of family medicine clerkship directors agreed that a standardized curriculum would be helpful. The goal of this study was to explore attitudes and preferences regarding a national family medicine sub-I curriculum among a broad set of stakeholders.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with medical students, residents, residency faculty, and undergraduate medical education faculty at the 2020 STFM Conference on Medical Student Education. Focus groups were transcribed, and a qualitative analysis was conducted with participants' responses about the benefits and characteristics of a family medicine sub-I, recommendations for core sub-I skills/objectives, likelihood of using a national curriculum, and preferred student and program evaluation methods.

RESULTS

There were four focus groups with a total of 24 participants. The following main themes emerged: the family medicine sub-I has distinctive characteristics from other sub-Is and provides unique benefits for students and residency programs, a standardized curriculum should allow for adaptability and flexibility, and the sub-I evaluation for the students and program should be specific and experience-focused. These themes were classified into specific subthemes.

CONCLUSIONS

The stakeholder emphasis on themes of uniqueness, adaptability, and specificity within evaluation will help educators structure a comprehensive framework for national recommendations for the sub-I curriculum. A well-designed family medicine sub-I may provide rigorous educational training for students and may also encourage career commitment to the discipline.