Faculty Bibliography

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.

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.

BACKGROUND:During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic physicians worked on the front lines, immersed in uncertainty. Research into perspectives of frontline physicians has lagged behind clinical innovation throughout the pandemic. OBJECTIVE:To inform ongoing and future efforts in the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a qualitative exploration of physician perspectives of the effects of policies and procedures as well as lessons learned while caring for patients during the height of the first wave in the spring of 2020. DESIGN/METHODS:A confidential survey was emailed to a convenience sample. Survey questions included demographic data, participant role in the pandemic, and geographic location. Eleven open-ended questions explored their perspectives and advice they would give going forward. Broad areas covered included COVID-19-specific education, discharge planning, unintended consequences for patient care, mental health conditions to anticipate, and personal/institutional factors influencing workforce well-being amid the crisis. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:We received fifty-five surveys from May through July 2020. Demographic data demonstrated sampling of frontline physicians working in various epicenters in the USA, and diversity in gender, race/ethnicity, and clinical specialty. APPROACH/METHODS:Inductive thematic analysis. KEY RESULTS/RESULTS:Four themes emerged through data analysis: (1) Leadership can make or break morale; (2) Leadership should engage frontline workers throughout decision-making processes; (3) Novelty of COVID-19 led to unintended consequences in care delivery; and (4) Mental health sequelae will be profound and pervasive. CONCLUSIONS:Our participants demonstrated the benefit of engaging frontline physicians as important stakeholders in policy generation, evaluation, and revision; they highlighted challenges, successes, unintended consequences, and lessons learned from various epicenters in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is much to be learned from the early COVID-19 pandemic crisis; our participants' insights elucidate opportunities to examine institutional performance, effect policy change, and improve crisis management in order to better prepare for this and future pandemics.

Implicit biases describe mental associations that affect our actions in an unconscious manner. We can hold certain implicit biases regarding members of certain social groups. Such biases can perpetuate health disparities by widening inequity and decreasing trust in both healthcare and medical education. Despite the widespread discourse about bias in medical education, teaching and learning about the topic should be informed by empirical research and best practice. In this paper, the authors provide a series of twelve tips for teaching implicit bias recognition and management in medical education. Each tip provides a specific and practical strategy that is theoretically and empirically developed through research and evaluation. Ultimately, these twelve tips can assist educators to incorporate implicit bias instruction across the continuum of medical education to improve inequity and advance justice.