Chan, Teresa M.

Abstract Background Precision medicine, sometimes referred to as personalized medicine, is rapidly changing the possibilities for how people will engage health care in the near future. As technology to support precision medicine exponentially develops, there is an urgent need to proactively improve our understanding of precision medicine and pose important research questions (RQs) related to its inclusion in the education and training of future emergency physicians. Methods A seven‐step process was employed to develop a research agenda exploring the intersection of precision and emergency medicine education/training. A literature search of articles about precision medicine was conducted first, which informed the creation of future four scenarios in which trainees and practicing physicians regularly discuss and incorporate precision medicine tools into their discussions and work. Based on these futurist narratives, potential education RQs were generated by an expert panel. A total of 59 initial questions were subsequently categorized and refined to a priority list through a nominal group voting method. The top/priority questions were presented at the 2023 SAEM Consensus Conference on Precision Medicine, Austin, Texas, for further input. Results Eight high‐value education RQs were developed, reflecting a holistic view of the challenges and opportunities for precision medicine education in the knowledge, skills, and attitudes relevant to emergency medicine. These questions contend with topics such as most effective pedagogical methods; intended resulting outcomes and behaviors; the generational differences between practicing emergency physicians, educators, and future trainees; and the desires and expectations of patients. Conclusions Emergency medicine and emergency physicians must be prepared to understand precision medicine and incorporate this information into their “toolbox” of thinking, problem solving, and communication with patients and colleagues. This research agenda on how best to educate future emergency physicians in the use of personalized data to provide optimal health care is the focus of this article.

Background/aim Teaching, mentoring, coaching, supervising and sponsoring are often conflated in the literature. In this reflection, we clarify the distinctions, the benefits and the drawbacks of each approach. We describe a conceptual model for effective leadership conversations where leaders dynamically and deliberately ‘wear the hats’ of teacher, mentor, coach, supervisor and/or sponsor during a single conversation. Methods As three experienced physician leaders and educators, we collaborated to write this reflection on how leaders may deliberately alter their approach during dynamic conversations with colleagues. Each of us brings our own perspective and lens. Results We articulate how each of the ‘five hats’ of teacher, mentor, coach, supervisor and sponsor may help or hinder effectiveness. We discuss how a leader may ‘switch’ hats to engage, support and develop colleagues across an ever-expanding range of contexts and settings. We demonstrate how a leader might ‘wear the five hats’ during conversations about career advancement and burn-out. Conclusion Effective leaders teach, mentor, coach, supervise and sponsor during conversations with colleagues. These leaders employ a deliberate, dynamic and adaptive approach to better serve the needs of their colleagues at the moment.

Leadership education in medicine is evolving to better meet the challenges of health care complexity, interprofessional practice, and threats from viruses and budget cuts alike. In this commentary, the authors build upon the findings of a scoping review by Matsas and colleagues, published in the same issue, and ask us to imagine what a learning ecosystem around leadership might look like. They subsequently engage in their own synthesis of leadership development literature and propose 6 key principles for medical educators and health care leaders to consider when designing leadership development within their educational ecosystems: (1) apply a conceptual framework; (2) scaffold development-oriented approaches; (3) accommodate individual levels of adult development; (4) integrate diversity of perspective; (5) interweave theory, practice, and reflection; and (6) recognize the broad range of leadership conceptualization.