Residency Learning Networks: Why and How

Learning Networks: How Family Medicine Departments Are Meeting the Requirement

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In 2023, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education added participation within a "learning collaborative" or "learning network" (LN) as a requirement for family medicine residencies. The structure and scope of what makes an acceptable LN was only vaguely defined. The purpose of this study was to learn how many family medicine residencies associated with departments already belong to LNs, the purpose and funding of these existing LNs, and barriers to entering LNs.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to family medicine department chairs through a Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance omnibus study from August to September 2023. Survey questions explored the purpose, structure, and funding of LNs that associated residency programs already belonged to as well as the chairs' beliefs and knowledge about LNs.

RESULTS

Of the 227 chairs, 119 completed the survey (50.2%). About 53% reported that their department was part of an LN, with more than one-third belonging for 5 years or less; 47% had a low understanding of what an LN is; and 71% had little to no concern that collaborating in an LN would negatively affect residency recruitment. The purpose of most LNs was a mix of research, education, and clinical activities. Faculty's lack of knowledge about LNs and lack of time were the top barriers identified to joining an LN. Funding was varied, and departmental funding was positively associated with administrative control of the LN.

CONCLUSIONS

About half of the residency programs associated with family medicine departments already belong to LNs. Wide variation among existing LNs may lead to significantly disparate outcomes for residents and residencies as they navigate this new requirement.

Overcoming Mission Competition in Departments of Family Medicine

Departments of family medicine are centered around the tripartite mission of education, research, and clinical care. Historically, these three missions have been balanced and interdependent; however, changes in the funding and structures of health systems have resulted in shrinking education and research missions and an increased emphasis on clinical care. In the wake of waning state and federal contributions to primary care research, many departments of family medicine have adopted a private practice approach. This approach is centered on generating revenue for the institution, incentivizing physicians to remain clinically focused through productivity and intense attention to volume targets. As a department's focus shifts to the clinical care mission, education and research are increasingly neglected and underresourced. Meanwhile, the administrative burden of electronic health records (EHRs) has further encroached on time previously allocated to research, with the EHR burden disproportionately affecting the primary care workforce. To counteract mission competition in departments of family medicine and to recover the vital missions of education and scholarship, devising a clear plan for reclaiming and sustaining a tripartite mission is important. Advocating for increased primary care research funding, enhancing EHRs, balancing clinical and education metrics, and supporting primary care research, especially for groups underrepresented in medicine, are interventions to help fully support education and research missions and to recover and sustain mission balance in departments of family medicine.