Dataset Information

Incorporating Sex and Gender-based Medical Education Into Residency Curricula.

ABSTRACT: Background:Emergency medicine (EM) residents do not generally receive sex- and gender-specific education. There will be increasing attention to this gap as undergraduate medical education integrates it within their curriculum. Methodology:Members of the Sex and Gender in Emergency Medicine (SGEM) Interest Group set out to develop a SGEM toolkit and pilot integrating developed components at multiple residency sites. The curriculum initiative involved a pre- and posttraining assessment that included basic demographics and queries regarding previous training in sex-/gender-based medicine (SGBM). It was administered to PGY-1 to -4 residents who participated in a 3-hour training session that included one small group case-based discussion, two oral board cases, and one simulation and group debriefing. Analysis:Components of the developed toolkit (https://www.sexandgenderhealth.org) were implemented at four unique SGEM Interest Group member residency programs. Residents (n = 82/174, 47%) participated; 64% (n = 49) were male and 36% (n = 28) were female. Twenty-six percent (n = 21) of the residents reported that they had less than 1 hour of training in this domain during residency; 59% (n = 48) reported they had 1 to 6 hours and 16% (n = 13) reported they had >6 hours. The average preassessment score was 61% and postassessment was 88%. After training, 74% (n = 60) felt that their current practice would have benefited from further training in sex-/gender-based topics in medicine during medical school and 83% (n = 67) felt their clinical practice would have benefited from further training in this domain during residency. Implications:The majority of EM residents who participated in this training program reported that they had limited instruction in this domain in medical school or residency. This initiative demonstrated a method that can be emulated for the incorporation of SGBM educational components into an EM residency training educational day. After training, the majority of residents who participated felt that their current practice would have benefited from further training in sex- and gender-based topics in residency.

SUBMITTER: McGregor AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7011412 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Incorporating Sex and Gender-based Medical Education Into Residency Curricula.

McGregor Alyson J AJ Greenberg Marna Rayl MR Barron Rebecca R Walter Lauren A LA Wolfe Jeannette J Deutsch Ashley L AL Johnson Steven A SA Robinett Derek A DA Beauchamp Gillian A GA

AEM education and training 20191006 Suppl 1

<h4>Background</h4>Emergency medicine (EM) residents do not generally receive sex- and gender-specific education. There will be increasing attention to this gap as undergraduate medical education integrates it within their curriculum.<h4>Methodology</h4>Members of the Sex and Gender in Emergency Medicine (SGEM) Interest Group set out to develop a SGEM toolkit and pilot integrating developed components at multiple residency sites. The curriculum initiative involved a pre- and posttraining assessm ...[more]

PMID: 32072111

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn evaluating the effectiveness of general surgery (GS) training, an unbiased assessment of the progression of residents with attention to individual learner factors is imperative.ObjectiveTo evaluate the role of trainee sex in milestone achievement over the course of GS residency using national data from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study evaluated female and male GS residents enrolled in ACGME-accredited programs in the US from 2014 to 2018 with reported variation in milestones performance across years in training and representation. Data were analyzed from November 2019 to June 2021.Main outcomes and measuresMean reported milestone score at initial and final assessment, and predicted time-to-attainment of equivalent performance by sex.ResultsAmong 4476 GS residents from 250 programs who had milestone assessments at any point in their clinical training, 1735 were female (38.8%). Initially, female and male residents received similar mean (SD) milestone scores (1.95 [0.50] vs 1.94 [0.50]; P = .69). At the final assessment, female trainees received overall lower mean milestone scores than male trainees (4.25 vs 4.31; P < .001). Significantly lower mean milestone scores were reported for female residents at the final assessment for several subcompetencies in both univariate and multivariate analyses, with only medical knowledge 1 (pathophysiology, diagnosis, and initial management) common to both. Multilevel mixed-effects linear modeling demonstrated that female trainees had significantly lower rates of monthly milestone attainment in the subcompetency of medical knowledge 1, which was associated with a significant difference in training time of approximately 1.8 months.Conclusions and relevanceBoth female and male GS trainees achieved the competency scores necessary to transition to independence after residency as measured by the milestones assessment system. Initially, there were no sex differences in milestone score. By graduation, there were differences in the measured assessment of female and male trainees across several subcompetencies. Careful monitoring for sex bias in the evaluation of trainees and scrutiny of the training process is needed to ensure that surgical residency programs support the educational needs of both female and male trainees.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Professionalism standards encourage physicians to participate in public advocacy on behalf of societal health and well-being. While the number of publications of advocacy curricula for GME-level trainees has increased, there has been no formal effort to catalog them. OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the existing literature on curricula for teaching advocacy to GME-level trainees and synthesize the results to provide a resource for programs interested in developing advocacy curricula. METHODS:A systematic literature review was conducted to identify articles published in English that describe advocacy curricula for graduate medical education trainees in the USA and Canada current to September 2017. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts to identify articles meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We abstracted information and themes on curriculum development, implementation, and sustainability. Learning objectives, educational content, teaching methods, and evaluations for each curriculum were also extracted. RESULTS:After reviewing 884 articles, we identified 38 articles meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Curricula were offered across a variety of specialties, with 84% offered in primary care specialties. There was considerable heterogeneity in the educational content of included advocacy curriculum, ranging from community partnership to legislative advocacy. Common facilitators of curriculum implementation included the American Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements, institutional support, and preexisting faculty experience. Common barriers were competing curricular demands, time constraints, and turnover in volunteer faculty and community partners. Formal evaluation revealed that advocacy curricula were acceptable to trainees and improved knowledge, attitudes, and reported self-efficacy around advocacy. DISCUSSION:Our systematic review of the medical education literature identified several advocacy curricula for graduate medical education trainees. These curricula provide templates for integrating advocacy education into GME-level training programs across specialties, but more work needs to be done to define standards and expectations around GME training for this professional activity.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Empathy and compassion are vital components of health care quality; however, physicians frequently miss opportunities for empathy and compassion in patient care. Despite evidence that empathy and compassion training can be effective, the specific behaviors that should be taught remain unclear. We synthesized the biomedical literature on empathy and compassion training in medical education to find the specific curricula components (skills and behaviors) demonstrated to be effective. METHODS:We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL using a previously published comprehensive search strategy. We screened reference lists of the articles meeting inclusion criteria to identify additional studies for potential inclusion. Study inclusion criteria were: (1) intervention arm in which subjects underwent an educational curriculum aimed at enhancing empathy and/or compassion; (2) clearly defined control arm in which subjects did not receive the curriculum; (3) curriculum was tested on physicians (or physicians-in-training); and (4) outcome measure assessing the effect of the curriculum on physician empathy and/or compassion. We performed a qualitative analysis to collate and tabulate effects of tested curricula according to recommended methodology from the Cochrane Handbook. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. RESULTS:Fifty-two studies (total n = 5,316) met inclusion criteria. Most (75%) studies found that the tested curricula improved physician empathy and/or compassion on at least one outcome measure. We identified the following key behaviors to be effective: (1) sitting (versus standing) during the interview; (2) detecting patients' non-verbal cues of emotion; (3) recognizing and responding to opportunities for compassion; (4) non-verbal communication of caring (e.g. eye contact); and (5) verbal statements of acknowledgement, validation, and support. These behaviors were found to improve patient perception of physician empathy and/or compassion. CONCLUSION:Evidence suggests that training can enhance physician empathy and compassion. Training curricula should incorporate the specific behaviors identified in this report.

Project description:PurposeSocial determinants of health (SDH) are recognized as important factors that affect health and well-being. Medical schools are encouraged to incorporate the teaching of SDH. This study investigated the level of commitment to teaching SDH; learning objectives/goals regarding student knowledge, skills, and attitudes; location in the curriculum and teaching strategies; and perceived barriers to teaching SDH.MethodsA team from the American Medical Association’s Accelerating Change in Medical Education Consortium developed a 23-item inventory survey to document consortium school SDH curricula. The 32 consortium schools were invited to participate.ResultsTwenty-nine (94%) schools responded. Most respondents indicated the teaching of SDH was low priority (10, 34%) or high priority (12, 41%). Identified learning objectives/goals for student knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding SDH were related to the importance of students developing the ability to identify and address SDH and recognizing SDH as being within the scope of physician practice. Curricular timing and teaching strategies suggested more SDH education opportunities were offered in the first and second undergraduate medical education years. Barriers to integrating SDH in curricula were identified: addressing SDH is outside the realm of physician responsibility, space in curriculum is limited, faculty lack knowledge and skills to teach material, and concepts are not adequately represented on certifying examinations.ConclusionDespite the influence of SDH on individual and population health, programs do not routinely prioritize SDH education on par with basic or clinical sciences. The multitude of learning objectives and goals related to SDH can be achieved by increasing the priority level of SDH and employing better teaching strategies in all years. The discordance between stated objectives/goals and perceived barriers, as well as identification of the variety of strategies utilized to teach SDH during traditional “preclinical” years, indicates curricular areas in need of attention.

Dataset Information

Incorporating Sex and Gender-based Medical Education Into Residency Curricula.

Publications

Incorporating Sex and Gender-based Medical Education Into Residency Curricula.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure