The tip of the iceberg: Generalism in undergraduate medical education, a systems thinking analysis

Abstract

AbstractPurposeThere is a shortage of generalist physicians globally impacting health equity and access to care. An important way in which medical schools can demonstrate social accountability is by graduating learners interested in careers in generalism. While generalism is endorsed as a matter of principle in medical education, how this translates into curricula is less clear. The aim of this study was to identify how generalism is understood and supported by family physician educational leaders in undergraduate medical education (UME) in Canada.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study, interviewing 38 family medicine leaders in UME across all 17 Canadian medical schools. We examined the data with template analysis, informed by the iceberg model of systems thinking.ResultsFour themes were identified: (1) Teaching and learning strategies in support of generalism—a consistent range existed across UME curricula; (2) Curriculum patterns—changes in leadership and curriculum reform created positive or negative feedback loops that promoted or hindered initiatives to support generalism; (3) Curriculum structures—organ‐system‐based curricula and availability of generalist faculty presented particular challenges to teaching generalist approaches; (4) Mental models and ways of knowing—the preponderance of biomedical frameworks of thinking in curricula unconsciously undermined generalist approaches to patient care.ConclusionsUME programmes promoted generalism through a range of teaching activities and strategies, but these efforts were countered by curriculum structures and mental models that perpetuate epistemic inequity between biomedical approaches to medical education and generalist models of care. Novel curricular frameworks are needed to align undergraduate programmes' commitment to social accountability with community‐based need.