Bio

Bio


Rebecca Miller-Kuhlmann, MD, is a board certified Neurologist and a Clinical Instructor of Neurology & Neurological Sciences. Her clinical interest focus on the diagnosis and treatment of neurologic conditions. She loves clinical medicine and works actively to maintain a wide-breadth of knowledge in order to best treat complex patients with multiple neurologic conditions.

As a former public school teacher prior to her medical career, she currently holds an honors certificate in medical education from Stanford and is passionate about medical education. She served as an education chief resident during her training and deeply enjoys working with medical students and residents both in the classroom and in the clinic.

Her additional academic interests include mitigation of the epidemic of physician burnout, for which she is a graduate of the American Academy of Neurology's Live Well Lead Well Leadership program and has co-developed and directs a wellness & mentorship program for neurology residents and fellows. She has also completed the Stanford CELT (clinical education leadership training) program for developing skills in quality improvement and enjoys teaching and fostering quality improvement work within the Stanford Neurology Residency.

Clinical Focus


  • Neurology

Academic Appointments


Honors & Awards


  • AAN Live Well Lead Well Leadership Program Graduate, American Academy of Neurology (2018)
  • Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Society, Stanford University (2017)
  • Christine Wijman Humanism in Medicine Award, Stanford University (2017)
  • Fisher's & Dunn Teaching Award, Stanford University (2017)
  • Neurology Clerkship Teaching Award, Stanford University (2014)
  • Dean's Award for Student Research (Health Profession's Education Pathway), UCSF (2013)
  • Phi Beta Kappa Honor Society, Duke University (2007)

Professional Education


  • Residency:Stanford University School of Medicine - Office of Graduate Affairs - Postdoctoral Affairs (2017) CA
  • Internship:Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (2014) CAUnited States of America
  • Medical Education:University of California San Francisco (2013) CA

Publications

All Publications


  • Essential steps in developing best practices to assess reflective skill: A comparison of two rubrics MEDICAL TEACHER Miller-Kuhlmann, R., O'Sullivan, P. S., Aronson, L. 2016; 38 (1): 75-81

    Abstract

    Medical education lacks best practices for evaluating reflective writing skill. Reflection assessment rubrics include the holistic, reflection theory-based Reflection-on-Action and the analytic REFLECT developed from both reflection and narrative-medicine literatures. To help educators move toward best practices, we evaluated these rubrics to determine (1) rater requirements; (2) score comparability; and (3) response to an intervention.One-hundred and forty-nine third-year medical students wrote reflections in response to identical prompts. Trained raters used each rubric to score 56 reflections, half written with structured guidelines and half without. We used Pearson's correlation coefficients to associate overall rubric levels and independent t-tests to compare structured and unstructured reflections.Reflection-on-Action training required for two hours; two raters attained an interrater-reliability = 0.91. REFLECT training required six hours; three raters achieved an interrater-reliability = 0.84. Overall rubric correlation was 0.53. Students given structured guidelines scored significantly higher (p < 0.05) on both rubrics.Reflection-on-Action and REFLECT offer unique educational benefits and training challenges. Reflection-on-Action may be preferred for measuring overall quality of reflection given its ease of use. Training on REFLECT takes longer but it yields detailed data on multiple dimensions of reflection that faculty can reference when providing feedback.

    View details for DOI 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1034662

    View details for Web of Science ID 000367061300010

    View details for PubMedID 25923234

  • The regulatory easy street: Self-regulation below the self-control threshold does not consume regulatory resources PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Vandellen, M. R., Hoyle, R. H., Miller, R. 2012; 52 (8): 898-902

    Abstract

    We present and test a theory in which self-control is distinguished from broader acts of self-regulation when it is both effortful and conscious. In two studies, we examined whether acts of behavioral management that do not require effort are exempt from resource depletion. In Study 1, we found that a self-regulation task only reduced subsequent self-control for participants who had previously indicated that completing the task would require effort. In Study 2, we found that participants who completed a self-regulation task for two minutes did not evidence the subsequent impairment in self-control evident for participants who had completed the task for four or more minutes. Our results support the notion that self-regulation without effort falls below the self-control threshold and has different downstream consequences than self-control.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2012.01.028

    View details for Web of Science ID 000303084800007

    View details for PubMedID 22711963

    View details for PubMedCentralID PMC3375861