Cited by 69Innovations in Medical EducationHealth and Medical EducationHealth and Medical Research Impacts

Perspective: Is It Time for Advocacy Training in Medical Education?

Open access
Croft, Daniel, Jay, Stephen J., Meslin, Eric M., Gaffney, Margaret M., Odell, Jere D.·2012·Academic Medicine

Abstract

As the modern medical system becomes increasingly complex, a debate has arisen over the place of advocacy efforts within the medical profession. The authors argue that advocacy can help physicians fulfill their social contract. For physicians to become competent in patient-centered, clinical, administrative, or legislative advocacy, they require professional training. Many professional organizations have called for curricular reform to meet society's health needs during the past 30 years, and the inclusion of advocacy training in undergraduate, graduate, and continuing medical education is supported on both pragmatic and ethical grounds. Undergraduate medical education, especially, is an ideal time for this training because a standard competency can be instilled across all specialties. Although the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education includes advocacy training in curricula for residency programs, few medical schools or residency programs have advocacy electives. By understanding the challenges of the health care system and how to change it for the better, physicians can experience increased professional satisfaction and effectiveness in improving patient care, systems-based practice, and public health.

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.0b013e31826232bc

Cites

48 of 48 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Sud SR, Barnert ES, Waters E, Simon P. Do medical professionalism and medical education involve commitments to political advocacy? Acad Med. Sep 2011;86(9):1061; author reply 1065.
  2. Council on Medical Education. Future Directions for Medical Education. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. 1982;248(24):3225-3239.
  3. Anderson M, Cohen J, Hallock J, Kassebaum D, Turnbull J, Whitcomb M. Learning objectives for medical student education--guidelines for medical schools. Report I of the Medical School Objectives Project. Acad Med. 1999;74:13-18.
  4. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physicians' charter. Lancet. 2002;359(9305):520-522.
  5. Ophthalmology Committee, ACGME. Ophthalmology FAQs: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; 2011. Parboosingh J. Medical schools' social contract: More than just education and research. CMAJ. 2003;168(7):852. (http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/downloads/RRC_FAQ/240_Ophthalmology_FAQ.pdf). Published July 2011. Accessed March 9, 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Croft, D., Jay, S. J., Meslin, E. M., Gaffney, M. M., & Odell, J. D.
Affiliations
Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Croft, Daniel
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2012-09
Volume
87
Issue
9
Pages
1165-1170
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050560981
Cited by
69
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
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 › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
Keywords
health care advocacy, medical curriculum, undergraduate medical education, residency training, continuing medical education, health policy advocacy, systems-based practice, job satisfaction
MeSH terms
Consumer Advocacy, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Graduate, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Health Education, Health Promotion, Humans, Internship and Residency, Physician's Role, United States

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