Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Despite the effectiveness of Diabetes Prevention Programmes (DPP) in reducing diabetes risk, primary care provider (PCP) referrals remain low, especially among men and racial/ethnic minorities, exacerbating their under-representation in DPPs. Understanding PCPs' perspectives on referrals is crucial for enhancing the intervention's reach and effectiveness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We conducted a qualitative study to explore PCPs' experiences, perspectives and engagement with DPP referrals, focusing on factors influencing variations in referral rates. Based on electronic record data, high and low-referring PCPs from a large integrated health system in the Bronx, NY, participated in interviews conducted between February and September 2023. Interviews were conducted and recorded on Zoom, anonymised, transcribed and analysed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:From 22 PCP interviews, 4 themes emerged representing factors that influenced referrals: (1) perceived barriers to the patient engagement with the DPP, including infrastructure gaps, programme accessibility issues and unmet social needs, particularly affecting low-referring PCPs; (2) perceived effectiveness of the DPP, with concerns raised about its efficacy, especially for male and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients; (3) perceived self-efficacy in referring patients, driven by knowledge gaps and limited opportunities, especially among low-referrers and (4) recommendations to facilitate and strengthen referrals, highlighting areas for PCP and patient support. The perspectives of high-referring/low-referring PCPs often differed across these themes and associated subthemes. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Our research illuminates the challenges PCPs face in treating prediabetic patients and factors influencing DPP referrals in underserved populations. This understanding can guide interventions to enhance equitable DPP referrals and engagement, thereby reducing diabetes risk in vulnerable populations.

Implicit biases are attitudes, emotions, or stereotypes that occur in an unconscious manner and have the potential to negatively affect behaviors, actions, and decisions. Recent studies have suggested that even when certain factors are controlled for, health care workers do not provide equitable care to patients from different demographics. When patients are not receiving equitable health care, there is a potential for disparities in patient-related outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine attitudes toward implicit bias among athletic trainers. A secondary purpose of this study was to assess differences and correlations between attitudes toward implicit bias and demographic factors including age, years of experience, gender identity, sexual orientation, and race. Participants were recruited for this study by emailing athletic trainers from publicly available staff directories at institutions of higher education and high schools, and athletic training education program directors. The survey consisted of questions gathering demographic information and questions taken from the Attitudes Toward Implicit Bias Instrument. A total of 218 athletic trainers (age = 38 [11] y, years of certified experience = 14 [11] y) opened and completed the survey. On average, participants scored 71.0 [11.2] on the Attitudes Toward Implicit Bias Instrument. This mean score indicated that the average participant felt that implicit bias had the potential to negatively impact patient care and needed to be addressed through education. There was a significant, negligible negative correlation between age and attitudes toward implicit bias (r[216] = -.157, P = .02). Examining implicit bias among athletic trainers warrants further research to understand how implicit bias can negatively affect access to equitable health care opportunities. The development of high-quality interventions for identifying and addressing implicit bias is crucial to ensuring optimal patient outcomes in athletic training and all medical settings.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Racial implicit bias can contribute to health disparities through its negative influence on physician communication with Black patients. Interventions for physicians to address racial implicit bias in their clinical encounters are limited by a lack of high-fidelity (realistic) simulations to provide opportunities for skill development and practice. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To describe the development and initial evaluation of a high-fidelity simulation of conditions under which physicians might be influenced by implicit racial bias. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This cross-sectional study, performed on an online platform from March 1 to September 30, 2022, recruited a convenience sample of physician volunteers to pilot an educational simulation. EXPOSURES/UNASSIGNED:In the simulation exercise, physicians saw a 52-year-old male standardized patient (SP) (presenting as Black or White) seeking urgent care for epigastric pain, nausea, and vomiting. The case included cognitive stressors common to clinical environments, including clinical ambiguity, stress, time constraints, and interruptions. Physicians explained their diagnosis and treatment plan to the SP, wrote an assessment and management plan, completed surveys, and took the Race Implicit Association Test (IAT) and Race Medical Cooperativeness IAT. The SPs, blinded to the purpose of the study, assessed each physician's communication using skills checklists and global rating scales. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Association between physicians' IAT scores and SP race with SP ratings of communication skills. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:In 60 physicians (23 [38.3%] Asian, 4 [6.7%] Black, 23 [38.3%] White, and 10 [16.7%] other, including Latina/o/x, Middle Eastern, and multiracial; 31 [51.7%] female, 27 [45.0%] male, and 2 [3.3%] other), the interaction of physicians' Race IAT score and SP race was significant for overall communication (mean [SD] β = -1.29 [0.41]), all subdomains of communication (mean [SD] β = -1.17 [0.52] to -1.43 [0.59]), and overall global ratings (mean [SD] β = -1.09 [0.39]). Black SPs rated physicians lower on communication skills for a given pro-White Race IAT score than White SPs; White SP ratings increased as physicians' pro-White bias increased. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this cross-sectional study, a high-fidelity simulation calibrated with cognitive stressors common to clinical environments elicited the expected influence of racial implicit bias on physicians' communication skills. The outlined process and preliminary results can inform the development and evaluation of interventions that seek to address racial implicit bias in clinical encounters and improve physician communication with Black patients.

One criticism of published curricula addressing implicit bias is that few achieve skill development in implicit bias recognition and management (IBRM). To inform the development of skills-based curricula addressing IBRM, we conducted a scoping review of the literature inquiring, "What interventions exist focused on IBRM in professions related to social determinants of health: education, law, social work, and the health professions inclusive of nursing, allied health professions, and medicine?"Authors searched eight databases for articles published from 2000 to 2020. Included studies: (1) described interventions related to implicit bias; and (2) addressed knowledge, attitude and/or skills as outcomes. Excluded were interventions solely focused on reducing/neutralizing implicit bias. Article review for inclusion and data charting occurred independently and in duplicate. Investigators compared characteristics across studies; data charting focused on educational and assessment strategies. Fifty-one full-text articles for data charting and synthesis, with more than 6568 learners, were selected. Educational strategies included provocative/engagement triggers, the Implicit Association Test, reflection and discussion, and various active learning strategies. Most assessments were self-report, with fewer objective measures. Eighteen funded studies utilized federal, foundation, institutional, and private sources. This review adds to the literature by providing tangible examples of curricula to complement existing frameworks, and identifying opportunities for further research in innovative skills-based instruction, learner assessment, and development and validation of outcome metrics. Continued research addressing IBRM would enable learners to develop and practice skills to recognize and manage their implicit biases during clinical encounters, thereby advancing the goal of improved, equitable patient outcomes.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Social determinants of health (SDH) are a substantial contributor to health outcomes and health inequities across populations. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has called for the incorporation of SDH into graduate medical education (GME), yet there is no consensus on what SDH knowledge or skills residents in primary care specialties should have on completion of training. The aim of this study was to develop expert consensus on the most important SDH knowledge topics and behavior learning goals for residents in 4 primary care fields. METHOD/METHODS:The authors used a modified Delphi technique to develop consensus among experts in internal medicine, pediatrics, family medicine, and obstetrics and gynecology across the United States via a survey administered between February and October 2021. They conducted a literature review on SDH in GME to develop an initial set of topics and learning goals and recruited experts who published about SDH and GME or led a SDH curriculum in GME. Consensus was determined a priori as 80% agreement that a topic or learning goal was very or extremely important.Results: Forty-one experts participated in the first round of the survey and 33 participated in the second round (80% retention). Experts reached consensus on the importance of 22/51 (43%) topics and 18/47 (38%) learning goals. Topics reaching consensus emphasized structural forces, broad domains of SDH, resources for addressing SDH, and advocacy strategies and resources. Learning goals reaching consensus focused on individual- and interpersonal-level behaviors. CONCLUSIONS:To the authors' knowledge, this study represents the first rigorous evaluation of expert consensus on SDH in GME across 4 primary care specialties. The results could inform curriculum development and implementation and program evaluation, residency program goals, and shared GME milestones. Among other things, future studies can assess expert consensus on SDH in GME across nonprimary care specialties.