Cited by 7Innovations in Medical EducationHealth and Medical EducationSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare

The Clinical Microsystems Clerkship at University of California, San Francisco: Integrating Clinical Skills and Health Systems Improvement for Early Medical Students

Open access
Chang, Anna, Pierluissi, Edgar, Cornes, Susannah, Ishizaki, Allison, Teherani, Arianne, Davis, John A, Hauer, Karen E, Lucey, Catherine R·2023·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Problem: Medical educators recognize that partnering actively with health system leaders closes significant health care experience, quality, and outcomes gaps. Medical schools have explored innovations training physicians to care for both individual patients and populations while improving systems of care. Yet, early medical student education fails to include systems improvement as foundational skills. When health systems science is taught, it is often separated from core clinical skills. Approach: The Clinical Microsystems Clerkship at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, launched in 2016, integrates clinical skills training with health systems improvement from the start of medical school. Guided by communities of practice and workplace learning principles, it embeds first-year and second-year students in longitudinal clinical microsystems with physician coaches and interprofessional clinicians one day per week. Students learn medical history, physical examination, patient communication, interprofessional teamwork, and health systems improvement. Assessments include standardized patient examinations and improvement project reports. Program outcome measures include student satisfaction and attitudes, clinical skills performance, and evidence of systems improvement learning, including dissemination and scholarship. Outcomes: Students reported high satisfaction (first-year, 4.10; second-year, 4.29, on a scale of 1–5) and value (4.14) in their development as physicians. Clinical skills assessment accuracy was high (70%–96%). Guided by interprofessional clinicians across 15 departments, students completed 258 improvement projects in 3 health systems (academic, safety net, Veterans Affairs). Sample projects reduced disparities in hypertension, improved opiate safety, and decreased readmissions. Graduating students reported both clinical skills and health systems knowledge as important to physician success, patient experience, and clinical outcomes (4.73). Most graduates discussed their projects in residency applications (85%) and disseminated related papers and presentations (54%). Next Steps: Integrating systems improvement, interprofessional teamwork, and clinical skills training can redefine early medical student education. Health system perspectives, long-term outcomes, and sustainability merit further exploration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000004955

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The session duration is a long session.

    “| Coaching process related | Session duration | Long session | [68,98,109] |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Approach section (Clinical skills curriculum and assessments; page unavailable) describes approximately one half-day per instructional week of clinical-skills practice and longitudinal feedback from physician coaches. It does not specify the duration of an individual coaching session, so it does not establish that coaching sessions are long. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Satisfaction is a coaching measure.

    “| Coaching measure | Satisfaction | [41,68] |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Abstract’s Outcomes section reports student satisfaction, and the Outcomes section treats it as part of the clerkship’s program evaluation. The paper describes physician coaches, but the satisfaction measure is not identified as a measure of coaching specifically. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Career readiness/transition to residency is a student outcome.

    “| Coaching outcomes | Student | Career readiness/transition to residency | [31,33,68] |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Outcomes section (Single class in-depth analysis; page not available) reports that 85% of graduates listed their project in residency applications, a student outcome related to the transition to residency. It does not assess career readiness or preparedness for residency; the reported perception of preparedness concerns clerkships instead. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Increasing QI is a student outcome.

    “| Coaching outcomes | Student | Increasing QIb | [68,107] |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Abstract’s Outcomes section reports that students, guided by clinicians, completed 258 improvement projects, and the Approach describes feedback on their quality-improvement work (page unavailable). This supports quality-improvement activity as a student outcome, but the paper does not establish an increase in students’ QI ability or attribute such an increase specifically to coaching. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 9 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chang, A., Pierluissi, E., Cornes, S., Ishizaki, A., Teherani, A., Davis, J. A., Hauer, K. E., & Lucey, C. R.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • San Francisco General Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Chang, Anna
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2022-10-03
Volume
98
Issue
1
Pages
57-61
ISSN
  • 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-808X
OpenAlex
W4304693721
Cited by
7
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Keywords
clinical microsystems, early medical education, clinical skills training, interprofessional education, communities of practice, workplace learning, medical students, improvement projects, hospital readmission, standardized patient assessment
MeSH terms
Clinical Clerkship, Clinical Competence, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Humans, Learning, San Francisco, Students, Medical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review