About Us > News

News

#IAMSE19 – Poster and Oral Abstracts and Award Nominees Now Online

Posted by

The academic program of the IAMSE 2019 Annual Meeting has now been finalized. We are excited to offer a large number of presentations on a variety of topics. The oral presentations can be found in the daily program on the website. The poster abstracts are listed in one of eight categories:

Assessment
Curriculum
Instructional Methods
Student Support
TBL/PBL
Technology Innovation
Other 

This year, we have 22 posters that are in the running for the Best Poster Presentation Award and 12 oral presentations for the Best Oral Presentation Award. These awards recognize the most outstanding medical education peer-reviewed presentations at the IAMSE annual meeting. The presenters of the winning poster and oral presentation will receive a plaque, one year of IAMSE membership, and access to one series of the IAMSE Audio Seminars. All award nominated posters and orals are scheduled to be presented on Sunday. In case you have not yet registered, we hope that the wealth of presentations might make you consider joining us in June. Additional meeting details and registration can be found atwww.iamseconference.org.

#IAMSE19 Focus Session Highlight: Entrustable Professional Activities – Implications for the Preclinical Faculty and Curriculum

Posted by

The 23rd Annual IAMSE Meeting will feature a host of new focus sessions throughout the entire meeting. One of our newly-added sessions is Entrustable Professional Activities – Implications for the Preclinical Faculty and Curriculum. This morning workshop will be given on Sunday, June 9 and will be led by Carrie Chen, Jessica Jones and Ming-Jung Ho.

Focus Session: Entrustable Professional Activities – Implications for the Preclinical Faculty and Curriculum
Time: Sunday, June 9 from 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM
Speakers:  Carrie Chen, Jessica Jones and Ming-Jung Ho – Georgetown UniversityThere is increasing interest in the use of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) to define and assess competencies in health professions education. Individual schools, as well as national organizations in multiple countries, have begun defining and adopting EPAs for undergraduate medical education. Typically these initiatives engage faculty in the clinical curriculum and focus on learning and assessment in the workplace. Yet an effective competency framework must engage faculty throughout the curriculum and address the preclinical as well as clinical curriculum. The goal of this focus session is to consider the roles of the preclinical faculty and the preclinical curriculum within an EPA context. Participants will discuss and proactively develop potential leadership roles for the preclinical faculty to effectively engage in and lead EPA implementation efforts to ensure the ongoing relevance of the classroom curriculum.
Session Objectives:
• Discuss the concept of entrustment and its application to classroom learning and assessment
• Develop strategies to incorporate entrustment into preclinical course expectations
• Analyze opportunities for improved partnership with the clinical curriculum within an EPA framework
• Engage in institutional conversations and help lead EPA implementation efforts at their home institutions 

To add this session to your schedule, please email us at support@iamse.org. You can also log back in to your registration using this link and update your schedule at any time.
Additional details about this and our other focus sessions, as well as registration information, can be found at http://www.iamseconference.org.

#IAMSE19 Focus Session Highlight: Strategies for Integrating Lifestyle Medicine and Experiential Wellness into Undergraduate Medical Curriculum

Posted by

The 23rd Annual IAMSE Meeting will feature a host of new focus sessions and workshops throughout the entire meeting. One of our first-time sessions is Strategies for Integrating Lifestyle Medicine and Experiential Wellness into Undergraduate Medical Curriculum. This afternoon session will be given on Monday, June 10 and will be led by Shipra Bansal and Michael Zawada.

Focus Session: Strategies for Integrating Lifestyle Medicine and Experiential Wellness into Undergraduate Medical Curriculum
Time: Monday, June 10 from 3:30 PM – 5:00 PM
Speaker: Shipra Bansal and Michael Zawada – AT Still University – School of Osteopathic Medicine in Arizona
 Lifestyle Medicine (LM) is a scientific approach to decreasing disease risk and illness burden. LM is recognized as the foundational approach to health by a growing publication of medical evidence. Dr. Bansal developed a core comprehensive approach to address the knowledge and skills of LM in medical school education. It is focused on expanding access to LM with a concentration on topics specifically attuned for medical students. These themes include nutrition, exercise/physical activity/ movement, Mind-Body Medicine, behavioral change, and self-care with periodic self-wellness assessments and care plans.

To address these skills and knowledge, A.T. Still University-School of Osteopathic Medicine in Arizona (ATSU-SOMA) has begun the integration of LM as a cohesive element throughout all 4 years of student education. The American College of Lifestyle Medicine (ACLM) learning objectives are incorporated with focused activities. Their faculty are involved in teaching and supporting an experiential learning model which will allow students to grow personally as well as professionally. The LM curriculum is designed to improve the resiliency and ability of our future physicians to deal with stress, depression, and burnout. This acquired understanding can be readily shared with their future patients. This focused session is designed to share the Osteopathic Wellness & Lifestyle (OWL) curriculum design with medical educators and describe our process.
Session Objectives:
• Discuss the current state of lifestyle medicine, and culinary nutrition in undergraduate medical education
• Develop strategies to integrate lifestyle medicine into their current curriculum
• Identify useful methods to teach students patient-care by teaching self-care
• Experience 3 distinct wellness activities that can be implemented in any educational setting. 
Additional details about this and our other focus sessions, as well as registration information, can be found at http://www.iamseconference.org.

Thank you,

IAMSE Still Accepting Items for the 2019 Raffle

Posted by

As the 2019 IAMSE Meeting gets closer, we would like to remind you one more time about our raffle. The purpose of the money raised from the raffle is to fund scholarships for attending the annual meeting. It is important to support and foster the interests and scholarly activities of the younger generation who will one day step into our shoes. This year, two people will visit the meeting in Roanoke with support from this fund. We hope this year’s event will be even more successful than before.

Please consider donating items that would be appealing to our members. 

Silent Auction

 Please let us know which item(s) you would like to donate by emailing support@iamse.org.
 Thank you for considering your contributions to this important endeavor. We look forward to seeing you in Roanoke!

If you organize or know of a workshop, symposium or educational activity that might be of interest to our educator community, share it with Medical Science Educator.

Posted by

In every issue of Medical Science Educator, we publish an announcements section. In this section, we share information that is of interest to the readership of the journal. Individual IAMSE members wishing to post medical education related announcements in the Journal are invited to send their requests to the Editorial Assistant at journal@iamse.org. Announcements may be IAMSE-related, announcements from other medical education organizations, medical education conference information or international issues affecting medical education. Announcements will be published at the Editors discretion.
 Deadline for inclusion in the September issue: July 5, 2019

Thank you,
Peter G.M. de Jong, PhD
Editor-in-Chief

Say Hello to Our May Featured Member, Michael Lee!

Posted by

Michael Lee
Michael Lee

Our association is a robust and diverse set of educators, researchers, medical professionals, volunteers and academics that come from all walks of life and from around the globe. Each month we choose a member to highlight their academic and professional career and see how they are making the best of their membership in IAMSE. This month’s Featured Member is one of our 2019 annual meeting workshop presenters, Michael Lee.

Michael Lee
Associate Professor
Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin

Dr. Michael Lee is an Associate Professor of Pharmacology in the Department of Medical Education at the Dell Medical School at the University of Texas at Austin. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from the University of South Florida and his Ph.D from University of South Florida College of Medicine, where he was an American Heart Associate pre-doctoral fellow. He completed a Ruth L Kirschstein NIH post-doctoral fellowship at the Shands Cancer Center at the University of Florida College of Medicine. Dr. Lee is actively engaged in basic science research and medical education research, which is aimed at identifying strategies to improve student learning and the long-term retention of pharmacology knowledge.

At the IAMSE 2019 Annual Meeting Dr. Lee is involved in two sessions: “Strategies for Advising, Mentoring, and Coaching: What’s the difference and why does it matter?” (Saturday, June 8, 2019 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM) and “Themes and Threads, Oh My: Managing a Longitudinal Discipline Across an Integrated Curriculum (Monday, June 10, 2019 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM). 

Why are these perfect topics to cover at the 2019 meeting?
Given the changes occurring in medical education, with more emphasis on self-directed learning, less direct instructor teaching and more integration of disciplines, the role teachers play in the educational process is evolving. In some cases, teachers are serving as learning partners or facilitators assisting students in finding and linking knowledge, rather than simply providing it to them in a lecture. Therefore, teachers need timely access to tools and strategies that will help them succeed in these new roles.  

How has being an IAMSE member helped you to create (or help to create) your workshop and focus session?
As an IAMSE member who regularly attends the annual meeting, I have been fortunate to have participated in many different types of sessions which have provided me with knowledge and skills I can take back to my institution. In addition, I have met a lot of new colleagues at the annual meetings who I am now collaborating with on research projects (including all of my co-presenters for our focus session on longitudinal discipline integration).

What type of activity will participants engage in each session?
In the pre-conference workshop, we will be using small and large group discussion, character traits assessment, and sharing stories/experiences about experiences coaching, advising, and mentoring, In the focus session we will also be using small and large group discussion.  

So, who should take these sessions with you?
In regards to the pre-conference workshop, anyone who is interested in learning more about coaching, advising, and mentoring: what they are, how they are different, and when to use them. In regards to the focus session, any teacher who is trying to get their arms around how to integrate disciplines (integration of different basic sciences or integration of basic sciences with clinical medicine).  

Anything else you’d like to add or highlight about these sessions or your membership in IAMSE?We definitely want to encourage early-stage faculty, students, and residents to attend so they can find out more about what other schools are doing and also get a sense of the education field as it currently stands. 

To learn more about the 2019 IAMSE Annual Meeting, including the plenary speakers, workshops and networking opportunities, or to register, please visit www.IAMSEconference.org.

#IAMSE2020A Kuala Lumpur – Call for Posters and Orals – Due Sept 15

Posted by

The International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE) is pleased to announce the call for abstracts for Oral and Poster presentations for the one-day IAMSE conference in Asia, on February 28, 2020, focusing on “Integration in Medical and Health Science Education.” The conference will take place in the internationally recognized Shangri-La Hotel in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The meeting immediately proceeds the international Ottawa Conference on assessment, also held in Kuala Lumpur. With the one-day IAMSE conference we specifically reach out to participants from the Asia-Pacific region, but of course, we also welcome participants from other parts of the world to join us. The IAMSE meeting offers opportunities for faculty development and networking, bringing together medical sciences and medical education across the continuum of health care education. Please click here to submit your abstract today.

Please note: The first time you enter the site, you will be required to create a user profile. Even if you did submit abstracts for IAMSE meetings in previous years, you need to create a new account. All abstracts for Oral and Poster presentations must be submitted in the format requested through the online abstract submission site.
Students who would like feedback on a draft of their abstract prior to final submission should email it to the Student Professional Development Committee, care of Mary Dereski, by June 15, 2019.

Submission deadline is September 15, 2019. There is no limit on the number of abstracts you may submit, but in the case of scheduling conflicts only presentations per presenter might be granted. Abstract acceptance notifications will be returned by November 15, 2019.

#IAMSE20 in Denver Call for Pre-Conference Workshops Due July 1

Posted by

On behalf of the International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE), I am pleased to announce that we are now accepting proposals for Saturday Professional Development Workshops for the 2020 IAMSE meeting. The 2020 annual meeting will be held in Denver, Colorado, USA from June 13 – 16, 2020.
Proposals will be accepted through July, 1, 2019. The committee will review all proposals and select 3-4 full day workshops and 6-8 half day workshops for the meeting.
 IAMSE Saturday Professional Development Workshops focus on Career/Professional Development, and the workshops should be useful for advancing the career of the attendee. The broad umbrella areas of focus for these workshops include:

• Leadership/Advancement as a Medical Educator
• Research/Scholarship/Publications
• Instruction/Assessment
• Technology

Saturday Professional Development Workshops proposals must include the following information:
• Title of the workshop
• Name and e-mail of Organizer
• Facilitator(s) information
• Summary of the workshop and how it will advance the career of the attendee
• Length of Workshop
• Level of the workshop (Introductory/intermediate/advanced)
• Who should participate

All abstracts must be submitted in the format requested through the online abstract submission site found here. 
 If you have any questions about submitting your proposal, please contact me via email atdanielle@iamse.org.

#IAMSE19 Faculty Development Course Highlight: Acute Stress Management for the Health Care Provider

Posted by

The 23rd Annual IAMSE Meeting will feature a host of new workshops throughout the entire meeting. One of our first-time workshops is Acute Stress Management for the Health Care Provider. This morning workshop will be given on Tuesday, June 11 and will be led by Matthew Carvey and Paul Feliu.

Workshop: Acute Stress Management for the Health Care Provider
Time: Tuesday, June 11 from 8:15 AM – 9:45 AM
Speakers: Matthew Carvey and Paul Feliu – St. George’s University

There is increasing awareness among healthcare providers of the emotional toll caused by acutely stressful cases. COPED, or Counsellor/psychiatrist, Outcome was uncontrollable, Personal stress management, Experience resulting from this event, and Debriefing/defusing, is an acronym providing guidance for managing stress. Employment of COPED can help prevent the development of more permanent psychiatric conditions, such as PTSD, in healthcare providers following such events.Session Objectives:
• Ability to implement the “COPED” acronym if/when a traumatic event occurs in the health care setting.
• Describe situations that could lead to the development of an acute stress response.
• Discuss further techniques that could identify acute stress reactions and implement these resources to attempt in preventing long-term psychiatric conditions.  
 Want to tweet about this session? Use #COPED in your tweets!
Additional details about this and our other Faculty Development Workshops, as well as registration information, can be found at http://www.iamseconference.org.

A Review from Medical Science Educator from Dr. Ann Poznanski

Posted by

Every month, the IAMSE Publications Committee reviews published articles from the archives of Medical Science Educator or of its predecessor JIAMSE. This month’s review is taken from MSE volume 28.

Medical Education needs to adapt to the needs of our future physicians so that we can ensure that we are preparing them to care for the health of their future patients. Because, in the words of the author, “the nature of contemporary disease has changed profoundly over the last century”, our current health care model and the methods we use to train health care providers are inadequately addressing these needs. One approach to address this challenge is discussed in a recent article entitled: Lifestyle Medicine: Why Do We Need It?, published in Medical Science Educator, December 2018, Volume 28, Supplement 1, pp 5–7, by author Hanno Pijl from the Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Endocrinology at Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden Netherlands.
 Dr. Pijl presents an impassioned argument for the inclusion of Lifestyle Medicine as an essential component of education for health care providers. The American College of Lifestyle Medicine provides a definition of Lifestyle Medicine: “Lifestyle Medicine involves the use of evidence-based lifestyle therapeutic approaches, such as a predominantly whole food, plant-based diet, regular physical activity, adequate sleep, stress management, avoidance of risky substance use, and other non-drug modalities, to prevent, treat, and, oftentimes, reverse the lifestyle-related, chronic disease that’s all too prevalent.”
 The need for education in Lifestyle Medicine is dictated by changes in disease prevalence. Due to the advances of antibiotics and anesthesia, the predominance of infectious disease and surgical emergency in the nineteenth and early twentieth century has shifted to chronic conditions. The author characterizes the profound change in the nature of contemporary disease as “a tsunami of chronic, “age-associated,” non-communicable disease.” These diseases include heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes. These are now the most common, costly, and preventable health problems in the world. For example, the National Diabetes Statistics Report published by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in 2017 found that 30.3 million people have diabetes (9.4% of the US population) and 84.1 million adults aged 18 years or older have prediabetes (33.9% of the adult US population). Although Type II diabetes, which has been called a global epidemic by the World Health Organization, was once thought to be incurable, numerous studies have now reported that lifestyle interventions have been successful in reversing this disease.
 The author’s first contention is that there is a mistaken assumption that chronic and non-communicable diseases are an inevitable consequence of the aging process. He states that the accumulation of damage in aging, due to an imbalance of cell damage and repair, is influenced by lifestyle factors such as nutrition. Moreover, he argues that most chronic disease is the result of an interaction between our genes and the environment and that behavioral and environmental cues trigger illness. Examples of these cues include “too much of the wrong food, prolonged stress, lack of physical exercise, bad sleep, smoking, and toxins.”
 The author describes multiple ways in which our current health care model is unsuited to our current epidemic of chronic non-communicable disease. The author contrasts the multifactorial diseases of today with the unifactorial diseases of previous times and contends that these are less amenable to the drug-centered approach of our current health care model. In addition, he argues for the importance of the inclusion of the patient’s psychosocial aspects in the diagnosis of disease. He argues that the integration of Lifestyle Medicine into our health care model will shift us to the prevention of disease with lifestyle adaptation as a primary treatment to restore health.
 Dr. Pijl also argues for the need for patients to take responsibility for their health and that the role of the healthcare provider should be that of an advisor. The success of this change of roles rests on the necessity of ensuring that both patient and healthcare provider are well educated on the origins of disease and the possibilities for restoring health. The author concedes that “it is very difficult indeed to live a healthy life in the context of the current society.” 
 As an Endocrinologist and educator treating patients with diabetes, this article comes as a report from the front lines. The author concludes that “since our modern lifestyle plays a crucial role in the etiology of these disorders, lifestyle medicine needs to be an integral part of our strategies to tackle the huge health threats we face today.” We can hope that our leaders in medical education can embrace this challenge and champion this approach to reforming healthcare education.
 Ann Poznanski, MD, PhD
Member IAMSE Publications Committee
Member IAMSE Board of Directors

MSE Still Accepting Manuscripts on Team-Based Learning

Posted by

Please note that we are still accepting manuscripts for the special journal section in the final issue of 2019. Medical Science Educator, the journal of the International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE), will be publishing a special journal section dedicated to the topic of “Team-Based Learning.” In this section, the journal would like to explore best practices from institutions around the world where TBL is implemented in the health sciences curriculum.
 
Manuscripts to be considered for this special section must be submitted by May 1st, 2019 through our online submission system that can be found by visiting: www.medicalscienceeducator.org. In your cover letter, please refer to the topic “TBL Special Section” to indicate that you would like to be included in the special section.


I look forward to receiving your submissions.

Thank you,
Peter G.M. de Jong, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Medical Science Educator

IAMSE Spring 2019 WAS Session 5 Highlights

Posted by

[The following notes were generated by Mark Slivkoff, PhD]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Spring 2019

Speakers: Michelle Daniel, MD, MHPE, FACEP
Assistant Dean for Curriculum and Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine and Learning Health Sciences
University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI USA

Title: Moving USMLE Step 1 After Core Clerkships: Rationale, Challenges, and Early Outcomes
Series: The Role of Basic Science in 21st Century Medical Education

The focus this week was once again on USMLE Step 1. Dr. Michelle Daniel of the University of Michigan School of Medicine presented this final seminar of our series which focused on the placement of Step 1 in the curriculum, a topic that has generated debate recently.

Currently, the ideal placement for Step 1 is unknown. Its current placement, usually at the end of the second year, is mainly based on tradition rather than an alignment of learning goals or outcomes. In her presentation, Dr. Daniel explained the rationale for, breaking with tradition from and altering the timing of Step 1. She also addressed early outcomes associated with the change and discussed potential challenges—and how to overcome them.

She started with a poll in which she asked the audience to choose the stage of change that describes your institution concerning the timing of Step 1:
• Pre-contemplative stage (Students take Step 1 following the preclinical curricula before entering clinical clerkships and currently, there are no thoughts of changing)
• Contemplative stage (Students take Step 1 following the preclinical curricula, but the institution is currently considering moving Step 1 after clerkships)
• Determined stage (Students take Step 1 following the preclinical curricula, but plans are currently underway to move Step 1 after clerkships)
• Action stage (Students currently take Step 1 after the core clerkships)
• N/A (Students do not take Step 1)

The results were similar to what Dr. Daniel has seen nationally. Over half (55%) of schools are in the pre-contemplative stage, about a third (32%) are in the contemplative stage, 1% are in the determined stage, while 8% are in the action stage.

As is the case with a majority of medical schools, Step 1 is given after years 1 and 2, the basic science years. Students memorize and purge the information during the examination, then promptly forget it. Schools who desire to move Step 1 usually argue that moving the timing of Step 1 after the core clinical year helps promote better retention of foundational science knowledge and basic and clinical science integration. Most schools who alter the timing of Step 1 do so as just one part of the process of determining the means by which science is delivered across the curriculum.

Anecdotally—Dr. Daniel continued—students report that when they study for Step 1 after core clerkships, the basic science information “feels stickier” since they are able to recall real patients they have encountered with certain conditions and it becomes easier to remember basic science concepts when they can create linkages to clinical care. The long question stems encountered on the USMLE are therefore easier to understand.

Another reason that schools move Step 1 is to boost their scores. As Dr. Daniel points out (and as last week’s poll also demonstrated), a majority of individuals desire making Step 1 pass/fail but the reality is that the score matters to residency directors. However, Dr. Daniel believes that this reason for change should be lowest on the list. What is critically important is that when schools have changed the timing, their scores have NOT been negatively impacted. Schools, therefore, can feel free to make sweeping changes to their curriculum, and this seems to be the trend since the list of schools who are making the change is increasing.

Dr. Daniel then took a dive into some of the data which she has published with her colleagues concerning the characteristics of schools which have moved Step 1 (Daniel et al. 2017). She then presented outcome data from a follow-up paper (Jurich et al. 2018). Specifically, they were interested in what happened to Step 1 scores and failure rates after moving the examination. Results indicated a slight increase in scores and a reduction in failure rates. Dr. Daniel additionally pointed out a highlight from the failure data in that the number of failures went down from 48 to 6. She also currently has a paper in review which focuses on Step 2 outcomes.

The conclusion of her webinar focused on the challenges (which she has published as well with her colleagues) (Pock et al. 2019). Since they lack a Step 1 study period to consolidate knowledge, students may not seem as prepared to start clerkships. Communication with clinical faculty must emphasize that learners entering the clerkships are “different” – not better or worse than historical students, but different. Curricula that foster the integration of basic and clinical sciences, as well as those that emphasize active learning in the pre-clerkship phase can help smooth this transition.

Another challenge to moving Step 1 is that weaker students may not be identified early and provided with appropriate academic support. Supplementing institutional exams with NBME basic science subject exams, the comprehensive basic science exam or comprehensive basic science self-assessment can help identify such learners before they get to Step 1.

Shelf exam performance weaknesses are another concern. Many institutions who have moved Step 1 after core clerkships report a decline in shelf exam performance, particularly in the early clerkships. The declines in shelf scores, as Dr. Daniel explained, are not surprising when one considers that students have not had as much practice with timed tests and NBME style questions.

Other challenges include students extending the Step 1 study period if there is not a firm “deadline” of when to take the exam, students becoming overly concerned about what residency specialty choices may be open to them until they know their Step 1 scores, and lastly, learners may be concerned about having enough time to take and pass Step 1, Step 2 CK, and 2 CS in rapid succession. Dr. Daniel suggested that all these things can be easily managed, however.

Dr. Daniel concluded her presentation just as she did at the beginning: with a poll. She asked now that you have learned a bit more, what would you advise your institution to do?
• Keep Step 1 after the pre-clerkship phase
• Move Step 1 after core clerkships
• It depends on the needs of curricular re-design, but I would be comfortable advocating either position

Approximately half of the respondents chose the latter, and the remaining responses were split between keeping Step 1 as is or moving it. Dr. Daniel once again emphasized the large drop in failure rates.

Similar to the previous four webinars, this one was also followed by numerous questions, too many to address before the hour concluded.

We wish to thank again all presenters and the audience who made this series such a success!

References:

• Daniel M., A. Fleming, C. O’Conner Grochowski, V. Harnik, S. Klimstra, G. Morrison, A. Pock, M. L. Schwartz, and S. Santen. Why Not Wait? Eight Institutions Share Their Experiences Moving United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 After Core Clinical Clerkships. Acad Med 2017;92:1515-1524.
• Jurich, D., M. Daniel; M. Paniagua, A. Fleming, V. Harnik, A. Pock, A. Swan-Sein, M.A. Barone, and S. Santen. Moving the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 After Core Clerkships: An Outcomes Analysis. Acad Med 2019;94:371-377.
• Pock, A. M. Daniel, S.A. Santen, A. Swan-Sein, A. Fleming, and V. Harnik. Challenges Associated With Moving the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 to After the Core Clerkships and How to Approach Them. Acad Med 2019. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002651