‍

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The Hopkins Circle and the Birth of Scientific Medicine

At the turn of the 20th century, a group of visionaries, William Welch (founding dean at Johns Hopkins), William Osler (chief of medicine), Frederick Gates (adviser to John D. Rockefeller), and Abraham Flexner, formed what historians call the Hopkins Circle. Together, they engineered a revolution in American medical education that would echo through the next century.

Abraham Flexner was an unlikely architect of this transformation. He wasn't a physician, he was a former high school teacher and educational reformer whose philosophy emphasized learning by doing and problem-solving rather than rote memorization. When the Carnegie Foundation tasked him with surveying American medical schools in 1910, he had never set foot in a medical school. But his outsider perspective proved valuable: he could see medical education as fundamentally an education problem, not just a medical one.

The German Model: Science as the Animating Force

Flexner's vision was heavily influenced by Theodore Billroth's "Medical Education in the German Universities" and his own travels through Europe. The German system positioned science as the "animating force" in a physician's life. Medical students spent their first two years immersed in laboratory sciences before progressing to clinical training in university hospitals. All physicians, not just researchers, were expected to generate new knowledge and advance medical science.

This was a radical departure from the American system of the early 1900s, where for-profit proprietary medical schools flooded the nation with poorly trained physicians. Many schools had minimal admission standards, inadequate laboratories, and little exposure to clinical material. Flexner's survey rated one-third of American medical schools as so substandard that closure was recommended. His report succeeded: those schools disappeared, state licensing laws gained teeth, and Johns Hopkins became the gold standard against which all medical education was measured.

The Racial Catastrophe: Black Medical Schools and the Closure of Opportunity

But the Flexner Report's impact was not equally distributed. Of the seven Black medical schools operating in 1910, only two survived: Howard University College of Medicine and Meharry Medical College. The other five, Leonard Medical School at Shaw University, the Medical Department of New Orleans University, Knoxville Medical College, the Medical Department of Central Tennessee College, and Flint Medical College, were shuttered.

This wasn't simply about raising standards. The closures decimated the pathways through which Black Americans could enter the medical profession during the Jim Crow era, when they were systematically excluded from white medical schools. Black physicians who had been training the next generation, serving their communities, and building medical infrastructure were suddenly without institutions. The result was a healthcare desert for Black communities that persists today.

The irony is sharp: while Flexner's report championed scientific rigor and high standards, it simultaneously destroyed the very institutions that were training physicians to serve populations most in need of medical care. The standards were necessary; the method of implementation was catastrophic. This tension, between excellence and access, between raising the bar and ensuring equity, remains unresolved in American healthcare education.

For dermatology, the implications are particularly acute. Skin of color dermatology was barely recognized as a specialty concern in 1910, and the loss of Black medical schools meant fewer physicians who understood the unique dermatologic needs of Black patients. We're still living with that deficit. Even today, dermatology remains one of the least diverse medical specialties, and patients with skin of color report difficulty finding providers who can accurately diagnose and treat their conditions.

The Scientific Triumph and Its Cost

The achievements of the Flexner model are undeniable. American medicine became the global leader in medical research and innovation. The scientific advances enabled by this system have immeasurably improved human lives. From understanding the human genome to developing life-saving treatments, we owe much to Flexner's emphasis on rigorous scientific training.

But the report had blind spots, significant ones that we're only now beginning to fully acknowledge and address. The human cost of those blind spots was borne disproportionately by Black Americans and the communities we served.

The Full-Time System: When Science Eclipsed Service

One of Flexner's most controversial innovations was the full-time system for medical faculty, borrowed directly from German universities. Academic physicians were to be freed from patient care responsibilities, provided adequate salaries, and dedicated entirely to research and teaching. The advancement of knowledge was to "trump all other involvements" in their lives.

William Osler and Harvey Cushing were vocal critics of this system. Osler worried that these physicians would "live lives apart with other thoughts and other ways"—that they would become "clinical prigs" removed from the messy realities of patients' lives. He believed Flexner had the priorities wrong: the welfare of patients and education of students should come before the advancement of knowledge, even as scientific understanding remained central to both.

Their concerns were drowned out by the "irresitible seduction" of Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundation money. But history has proven Osler prescient.

The Imbalance: Patients in Service of Science

As medical historian Edmund Pellegrino later observed, the Flexnerian system created "neutered technicians with patients in the service of science rather than science in the service of patients." The hyper-rational German model, while scientifically productive, neglected the ethos of medicine, the healer's role, the sacred trust of the doctor-patient relationship, the art of witnessing suffering.

The pendulum had swung too far. Medical schools became focused on producing researchers and specialists rather than community physicians. The primary care crisis we face today, the epidemic of provider burnout, the complaint that "doctors don't listen anymore", these are all downstream effects of Flexner's reordering of medicine's priorities.

And for communities of color already underserved by the healthcare system, the Flexnerian model's emphasis on academic medicine and research over community-based practice created yet another barrier to access.

‍

NEW STANDALONE SECTION: THE FLEXNER REPORT'S RACIAL LEGACY AND DERMATOLOGY'S DIVERSITY GAP

From Medical School Closures to Dermatology Deserts

The connection between the Flexner Report and today's dermatology equity gap is direct and undeniable. When five of the seven Black medical schools closed, the pipeline of Black physicians, including those who would have specialized in dermatology, was severed. The surviving schools, Howard and Meharry, could not alone meet the need for Black physicians that had been distributed across seven institutions.

The numbers tell the story: Today, Black physicians represent only 5% of the physician workforce despite Black Americans comprising 13% of the U.S. population. In dermatology, the numbers are even more stark, Black dermatologists represent approximately 3% of the specialty. This shortage has real clinical consequences.

The Clinical Impact: When Dermatology Education Ignores Skin of Color

Patients with skin of color experience delayed diagnoses, misdiagnoses, and undertreatment of dermatologic conditions because too few providers are trained to recognize how conditions present on darker skin. Melanoma in Black patients is often diagnosed at later stages with worse outcomes. Conditions like keloids, central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia (CCCA), and pseudofolliculitis barbae, which disproportionately affect Black patients, receive insufficient attention in standard dermatology curricula.

The Flexner Report's closure of Black medical schools didn't just reduce the number of Black physicians; it reduced the accumulation of clinical knowledge about conditions affecting Black patients. The physicians at those closed institutions weren't just educators, they were repositories of expertise about the dermatologic needs of their communities. When the schools closed, that knowledge was scattered and marginalized.

The Educational Gap That Remains

Even today, most dermatology textbooks and training programs use predominantly light-skinned models for demonstrating skin conditions. A 2018 study found that images of dark skin comprised only 12% of images in major dermatology textbooks. Medical students and dermatology residents can complete their training with minimal exposure to skin of color dermatology, perpetuating the cycle of inadequate care.

This is where nurse practitioners, particularly those of us committed to healthcare representation and skin of color dermatology, have an opportunity and an obligation. We can be the generation that finally corrects Flexner's blind spot.

‍

What Nurse Practitioners Can Do Differently

Unlike the physician training pipeline, NP education has greater flexibility and more diverse entry points. We can:

• Prioritize skin of color education in our own continuing education and in the training programs we develop
• Build practices that specifically serve underserved communities
• Create educational content that centers diverse skin tones
• Mentor NPs from underrepresented backgrounds into dermatology and cosmetics
• Advocate for curriculum changes in NP programs to ensure all graduates are competent in assessing and treating skin of color
• Document and publish our clinical findings with diverse patient populations

The Flexner Report created a legacy of exclusion. We have the power, and the responsibility, to create a legacy of inclusion.

‍

IMPLICATIONS FOR DERMATOLOGY AND COSMETIC NURSE PRACTITIONERS:

As dermatology and cosmetic NPs, we practice at the intersection of science, art, and human vulnerability. Our patients come to us with concerns that the Flexnerian model might dismiss as "merely cosmetic", but we know better. Severe acne, alopecia, vitiligo, hidradenitis suppurativa, and other visible skin conditions carry profound psychological, social, and economic consequences. Patients experience depression, anxiety, social isolation, employment discrimination, and even suicidality at higher rates than the general population.

The Flexner Report's emphasis on "serious" scientific medicine contributed to a healthcare hierarchy that devalues conditions without clear mortality risk. But the mental health burden, the quality of life impact, the employment consequences, these are as real and as serious as any "life-threatening" condition. When we advocate for comprehensive treatment coverage, when we document functional impairment, when we refuse to dismiss our patients' suffering as vanity, we're correcting a century-old blind spot.

Our unique role includes:

Clinical Advocacy: We write compelling letters of medical necessity, document quality of life impacts, and appeal insurance denials for treatments deemed "cosmetic." We understand that clear skin or restored hair can be life-changing, not because of aesthetics alone, but because of the restoration of confidence, social functioning, and economic opportunity.

Holistic Assessment: Unlike the Flexnerian physician-scientist focused narrowly on disease pathology, we assess our patients in their full context, their social and political determinants of health, their cultural beliefs about skin and beauty, their financial constraints, their health literacy, their support systems. This is nursing's inheritance, and it's precisely what the Flexner model failed to preserve.

Accessible Expertise: Many of us practice in underserved areas where dermatologists are scarce or nonexistent. We're filling critical gaps not because we're "lesser than" but because our model of care, comprehensive, accessible, relationship-based, is what patients need. We manage complex cases independently, educate communities, and build trust in populations that have been underserved by the traditional medical system.

Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Flexnerian full-time system assumed physicians would be salaried employees of universities, focused on research. But as entrepreneurial NPs, we're creating practices that integrate evidence-based care with financial sustainability, patient satisfaction, and our own professional fulfillment. We're proving that excellent care doesn't require sacrificing the healing relationship to productivity metrics.

The implications are clear: we're not just practitioners working within the Flexnerian system. We're actively reforming it, returning medicine to a balance of science and service that Flexner's report disrupted.

‍

‍

CLINICAL PEARLS / KEY TEACHING POINTS FOR PATIENT EDUCATION:

What Patients Need to Know (Adapted from Flexner's Legacy):

• Your Skin Condition is Not "Just Cosmetic": Research shows that visible skin conditions affect mental health, employment, relationships, and quality of life just as significantly as many conditions considered "serious" by insurance companies. Your suffering is real and deserves comprehensive treatment.
  
  
• You Deserve a Provider Who Sees All of You: The best care happens when your provider understands not just the biology of your condition, but also how it affects your daily life, your cultural background, your financial situation, and your personal goals. You're not a disease to be solved, you're a person to be cared for.
  
  
• Scientific Excellence and Compassionate Care Aren't Opposites: Your NP combines cutting-edge knowledge about treatments with genuine concern for your wellbeing. You shouldn't have to choose between a provider who knows the latest research and one who actually listens to you.
  
  
• Insurance Denials Don't Mean Your Treatment Isn't Necessary: Many insurance companies still operate with outdated ideas about what conditions are "worth" treating. If your treatment is denied, your provider can advocate for you by documenting how your condition affects your functioning and quality of life.
  
  
• Prevention and Early Intervention Matter: One of the lessons from medical history is that waiting until problems become severe costs more, in suffering, in complications, and in money. Addressing skin concerns early, before they cause scarring or significant psychological impact, is good medicine.
  
  
• Your Cultural Background Affects Your Skin Health: Different skin tones present conditions differently, have different risks, and may require different treatment approaches. You deserve a provider who understands how your specific background influences your skin health and beauty ideals.
  
  
• You're Part of the Treatment Team: The best outcomes happen when you understand your condition, participate in treatment decisions, and feel empowered to ask questions. Your provider should be educating and partnering with you, not just prescribing to you.
  
  

‍

DNP PROJECT IDEAS:

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT (QI) PROJECT

Title: "Implementing Holistic Patient Assessment Tools in Dermatology NP Practice: Measuring Impact on Patient Satisfaction and Treatment Adherence"

Aim/Purpose: To develop and implement a standardized holistic assessment protocol that evaluates not just clinical presentation but also quality of life impact, social determinants of health, mental health screening, and patient goals, addressing the Flexnerian gap between scientific assessment and whole-person care.

Description: This QI project would create a brief, validated assessment tool (5-10 minutes) that dermatology NPs administer at initial visits and key follow-ups. The tool would assess: (1) dermatology-specific quality of life scores, (2) social/occupational impact, (3) depression/anxiety screening, (4) health literacy and cultural factors, (5) financial barriers to treatment, and (6) patient-defined success metrics. The project would measure changes in patient satisfaction scores, treatment adherence rates, and clinical outcomes over 6-12 months compared to baseline data. This directly addresses the Flexner Report's blind spot by systematically integrating the "art" of medicine with scientific assessment.

EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE (EBP) PROJECT

Title: "Integrating Professional Formation and Patient-Centered Communication Training into Dermatology NP Continuing Education: An Evidence-Based Approach"

Aim/Purpose: To develop and evaluate an evidence-based continuing education curriculum for practicing dermatology NPs that addresses the gap identified in the Flexner legacy, balancing scientific competence with professional formation, cultural humility, and communication skills.

Description: Drawing on the current medical education reforms described in the Flexner centennial reviews, this project would create a comprehensive CE program covering: (1) foundations of medical professionalism and nursing's unique contribution, (2) difficult conversations in dermatology (discussing "cosmetic" concerns with dignity, delivering bad news about skin cancers, addressing body image), (3) healthcare access and skin of color dermatology, (4) clinical advocacy skills (writing letters of medical necessity, appealing denials), and (5) preventing burnout through professional meaning-making. The project would evaluate participant knowledge, confidence, and implementation of learned skills through pre/post assessments and 3-month follow-up. Success metrics would include changes in patient satisfaction scores and provider-reported professional fulfillment.

POLICY-FOCUSED INITIATIVE

Title: "Advocating for Insurance Coverage of Dermatologic Conditions with Significant Quality of Life Impact: A Policy Initiative to Address the 'Cosmetic' Stigma"

Aim/Purpose: To develop and advocate for policy changes at the state or organizational level that mandate insurance coverage for dermatologic treatments addressing conditions with documented quality of life, psychological, or functional impact, challenging the Flexnerian hierarchy that devalues conditions without clear mortality risk.

Description: This policy project would: (1) conduct a comprehensive review of current insurance coverage policies for conditions like severe acne, CCCA, vitiligo, hidradenitis suppurativa, and other visible dermatologic conditions, (2) gather evidence from peer-reviewed literature documenting the psychological, social, and economic impact of these conditions, (3) collect patient testimonials and quality of life data from your practice, (4) develop policy briefs and proposed legislative language mandating coverage for treatments addressing conditions with quality of life impact scores above specific thresholds, and (5) present these recommendations to state insurance commissioners, legislators, or large insurance company medical directors. Success would be measured by policy changes enacted, coverage denials overturned, or organizational policy adoptions.

‍

STEP-BY-STEP GUIDE: FROM IDEA TO IMPLEMENTATION

Implementing the Holistic Patient Assessment QI Project:

Step 1: Problem Identification and Baseline Data Collection (Weeks 1-4) Begin by documenting the current state of your practice. Review patient satisfaction surveys, treatment adherence rates, and complaint data for the past 6-12 months. Conduct brief surveys or focus groups with 10-15 patients asking: "What do you wish your provider understood about how your skin condition affects your life?" and "What would make your care experience better?" This qualitative data will reveal the gaps between your current assessment process and what patients need, the same gaps the Flexner Report created by emphasizing disease pathology over patient experience. Calculate baseline metrics: current patient satisfaction scores, treatment adherence rates, and no-show rates.

Step 2: Tool Development and Validation (Weeks 5-8) Create your holistic assessment tool by integrating validated instruments: (1) Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) or Skindex for disease-specific quality of life, (2) PHQ-2 or GAD-2 for depression/anxiety screening, (3) questions about employment/social impact ("Has your skin condition affected your ability to work or socialize?"), (4) health literacy assessment (3 questions), (5) financial barriers ("Are medication costs preventing you from following your treatment plan?"), and (6) patient goals ("What would successful treatment look like to you?"). Pilot the tool with 5-10 patients, timing how long it takes and gathering feedback on clarity. Revise as needed. Train all providers and staff on administration and interpretation.

Step 3: Implementation and Integration (Weeks 9-12) Roll out the assessment tool systematically. Integrate it into your EHR workflow, decide whether it's administered by medical assistants before the visit, completed by patients on tablets in the waiting room, or conducted by the NP during the encounter. Create a documentation template that flags high-risk findings (high DLQI scores, positive depression screening, significant barriers) for immediate NP attention. Develop response protocols: what happens when a patient screens positive for depression? When financial barriers are identified? When quality of life impact is severe? These protocols should include referral pathways, patient assistance program information, and mental health resources. This systematic approach addresses what Flexner's model lacked: integration of the patient's whole experience into clinical care.

Step 4: Monitoring and Adjustment (Months 4-6) Track your process and outcome metrics weekly: (1) What percentage of eligible patients complete the assessment? (2) What are the most common barriers or concerns identified? (3) Are providers using the information to adjust care plans? (4) Are staff comfortable with the new workflow? Conduct monthly team meetings to troubleshoot barriers and celebrate successes. Survey 10-15 patients at month 3: "Did the assessment help your provider understand your needs?" and "Do you feel your provider sees you as a whole person?" Adjust the tool or process based on feedback. This iterative approach mirrors the problem-solving educational philosophy that Flexner himself valued, even as his report overlooked its application to patient care.

Step 5: Evaluation and Dissemination (Months 7-12) At 6 and 12 months, compare your outcome metrics to baseline: patient satisfaction scores, treatment adherence rates, no-show rates, and patient-reported quality of life improvements. Analyze the data: which interventions (referrals to mental health, connecting patients to financial assistance, adjusting treatment plans based on patient goals) had the biggest impact? Write up your findings in a format suitable for presentation at your state NP conference or submission to a nursing journal. Share your tool and process with colleagues, contributing to the profession-wide effort to rebalance the art and science of medicine. This dissemination continues the work that began with the Flexner Report, transforming individual practice innovations into systemic improvements, but with the crucial difference that your innovation centers patient experience rather than just scientific advancement.

‍

PHD NURSE RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES (Priority gaps & topics):

Priority Research Gaps Identified:

Based on the Flexner Report's historical analysis and its ongoing implications, several critical research gaps emerge for nurse scientists:

• The Impact of Educational Philosophy on Patient Outcomes: How do different models of healthcare professional education (Flexnerian scientific model vs. nursing's holistic model vs. integrated approaches) affect patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, health outcomes, and provider burnout?
  
  
• Measuring the "Art" of Medicine: What validated instruments can quantify the relational, empathetic, and holistic dimensions of clinical care, the elements the Flexner Report failed to systematically value? How do these dimensions independently contribute to patient outcomes?
  
  
• The Economics of Whole-Person Care: What is the cost-effectiveness of care models that integrate systematic assessment of social determinants, mental health, and quality of life impacts compared to traditional biomedical-only models? Do holistic assessment and intervention reduce overall healthcare costs through improved adherence and prevention?
  
  
• Professional Formation in Advanced Practice Nursing: How do NPs develop and maintain professional identity that integrates scientific competence with healing presence? What educational experiences, mentorship models, or practice environments best support this integration?
  
  
• The Stigma of "Cosmetic" in Dermatology: How does the medical system's hierarchy of condition "seriousness" affect insurance coverage, research funding, and patient outcomes for visible dermatologic conditions? What is the economic and psychological burden of this stigma on patients and society?
  
  

Potential PhD Dissertation Topics:

"From Flexner to Flourishing: Comparing Patient Outcomes in NP-Led vs. Physician-Led Dermatology Practices"

This mixed-methods study would compare patient outcomes, satisfaction, treatment adherence, and quality of life improvements between NP-led dermatology practices (theoretically more likely to integrate holistic assessment and patient-centered care) and traditional physician-led practices. The study would use validated instruments to measure both the "science" (clinical outcomes, evidence-based treatment utilization) and the "art" (patient-reported experience, therapeutic alliance, attention to psychosocial factors) of care. Qualitative interviews with patients and providers would explore the mechanisms through which different care philosophies affect outcomes. This research directly addresses the Flexner legacy by empirically testing whether nursing's integrated model produces superior outcomes.

"Measuring What Matters: Development and Validation of the Integrative Clinical Care Scale (ICCS)"

This instrument development study would create and validate a tool to measure the degree to which individual providers and healthcare systems integrate scientific medicine with holistic, patient-centered care, operationalizing the balance that Flexner's report failed to achieve. The ICCS would assess domains including: thoroughness of biopsychosocial assessment, attention to social determinants, shared decision-making, cultural humility, continuity of relationship, and professional presence. The study would establish reliability and validity, correlate scores with patient outcomes and satisfaction, and potentially identify which specific integrative behaviors most strongly predict positive outcomes. This research would provide the field with a way to measure and therefore improve the art-science integration.

"The Cost of Invisibility: Economic Impact of Insurance Denial for Dermatologic Conditions with Quality of Life Burden"

This health economics study would quantify the downstream costs (in terms of mental healthcare utilization, lost productivity, disability claims, and long-term complications) of insurance denials for treatments of visible dermatologic conditions currently classified as "cosmetic." Using large insurance databases and patient registries, the research would track cohorts of patients with conditions like severe acne, alopecia areata, or vitiligo who were denied coverage for evidence-based treatments. Outcomes would include subsequent mental health diagnoses, antidepressant prescriptions, employment disruption, emergency department visits for complications, and progression to more severe disease requiring more expensive interventions. The study would calculate the economic burden of the "cosmetic" stigma, a direct legacy of the Flexner Report's hierarchy of medical seriousness, and provide evidence for policy change.

‍

‍

ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES AND BUSINESS STRATEGIES:

The Holistic Dermatology Practice Model

The Flexner Report's legacy has created a market opportunity for NP entrepreneurs who can offer what the traditional system struggles to provide: scientifically excellent care delivered in a genuinely patient-centered, holistic manner. Build a practice that explicitly markets this integration. Your value proposition: "Evidence-based dermatology that sees the whole you, not just your skin." Differentiate yourself by offering longer appointment times (30-45 minutes instead of 15), systematic assessment of quality of life impacts, integrated mental health screening and referral, proactive financial counseling (discussing costs upfront, connecting patients to assistance programs before they struggle), and cultural humility training for all staff. Market to patients who've felt dismissed or rushed in traditional dermatology settings. Price strategically, you may charge slightly more than competitors, but emphasize value: better outcomes, better experience, fewer follow-up visits needed because issues are addressed comprehensively the first time. This model directly capitalizes on patient dissatisfaction with the Flexnerian system's failure to balance science and service.

Educational Products for Professional Formation

There's enormous demand from fellow NPs for education that goes beyond clinical knowledge to address the "how to be" questions: How do I balance scientific rigor with compassionate presence? How do I avoid burnout while maintaining empathy? How do I advocate for my patients without exhausting myself fighting insurance companies? How do I build a practice that's both financially successful and professionally meaningful? Create a comprehensive online course, membership community, or certification program focused on "Professional Mastery in Dermatology NP Practice." Content modules could include: (1) Integrating the Art and Science of Dermatology Care, (2) Advanced Patient Communication for Difficult Conversations, (3) Clinical Advocacy: Fighting the "Cosmetic" Stigma, (4) Health Equity in Dermatology, (5) Sustainable Practice Models that Resist Burnout, (6) Entrepreneurship for Mission-Driven NPs. Price at $497-$997 for a comprehensive program or $97/month for ongoing membership. This taps into the massive market of NPs seeking to practice in a way that honors both their clinical competence and their healing values, addressing the very tension the Flexner Report created.

Consulting for Healthcare Systems on Patient Experience Transformation

Healthcare organizations are desperate to improve patient satisfaction scores but often don't know how beyond superficial fixes. Position yourself as an expert consultant who can help dermatology departments and medical practices transform their care delivery to integrate the scientific and relational dimensions of excellent care. Offer a systematic assessment of current practices, staff training on holistic assessment and communication, workflow redesign to allow for whole-person care without destroying productivity, and ongoing coaching for providers. Your unique angle: you understand both the clinical science (you're a practicing NP) and the historical/systemic reasons why medicine struggles with patient-centeredness (the Flexner legacy). Charge $5,000-$15,000 per engagement depending on organization size. Market to hospital systems implementing new patient experience initiatives, private equity-backed dermatology groups trying to differentiate themselves, and academic medical centers trying to reform medical education. This positions you as a thought leader addressing a century-old problem that's becoming increasingly urgent as patient expectations evolve and reimbursement models shift to value-based care.

‍

CLOSING STATEMENT:

The Flexner Report transformed American medicine more than a century ago, creating the scientific foundation that enables the remarkable care we provide today. But that transformation came at a cost: the near-loss of medicine's soul, the eclipse of healing by hyper-rational science, the reduction of patients to biological problems rather than human beings deserving our compassionate witness. As nurse practitioners, we stand in a unique position. We inherited nursing's holistic philosophy even as we mastered the scientific competencies the Flexner Report championed. We've never had to choose between being scientists and being healers, we've always been both. The work we do daily, assessing our patients in their full complexity, advocating for treatments others dismiss as "cosmetic," building practices that honor both evidence and humanity, is the work of rebalancing medicine. We're not just practitioners. We're reformers, continuing the essential work that Flexner began while correcting the blind spots his vision created. The edifice of American medicine that the Hopkins Circle built remains magnificent, but it needed renovation. That's our work. That's our calling. And we're exactly the right people to do it.

‍

About the Author

Dr. Kimberly Madison, DNP, AGPCNP-BC, WCC, is a Board-Certified, Doctorally-prepared Nurse Practitioner, educator, and author dedicated to advancing dermatology nursing education and research with an emphasis on skin of color. As the founder of Mahogany Dermatology Nursing | Education | Research™ and the Alliance of Cosmetic Nurse Practitioners™, she expands access to dermatology research, business acumen, and innovation while also leading professional groups and mentoring clinicians. Through her engaging and informative social media content and peer-reviewed research, Dr. Madison empowers nurses and healthcare professionals to excel in dermatology and improve patient care.

‍

Reference

Duffy, T. P. (2011). The Flexner Report — 100 years later. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 84 (3), 269–276.

‍