Faculty development using a virtual community of practice: Three-year outcomes of the Academic Life in Emergency Medicine Faculty Incubator program.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
The Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program is a longitudinal, 1-year, virtual faculty development program for early- and mid-career faculty members that crosses specialties and institutions. This study sought to evaluate the outcomes among 3 years of participants.Methods
This cross-sectional survey study evaluated postcourse and 1-year outcomes from three graduated classes of the ALiEM Faculty Incubator program. The program evaluation survey was designed to collect outcomes across multiple Kirkpatrick levels using pre/post surveys and tracking of abstracts, publications, speaking opportunities, new leadership positions, and new curricula.Results
Over 3 years, 89 clinician educators participated in the program. Of those, 59 (66%) completed the initial survey and 33 (37%) completed the 1-year survey. Participants reported a significant increase in knowledge (4.1/9.0 vs. 7.0/9.0). The number of abstracts, publications, and invited presentations significantly increased after course completion and continued postcourse. A total of 37 of 59 (62.7%) developed a new curriculum during the course and 19 of 33 (57.6%) developed another new curriculum after the course. A total of 29 of 59 (49.2%) began a new leadership position upon course completion with 15 of 33 (45.5%) beginning another new leadership position 1 year later.Discussion
The ALiEM Faculty Incubator program demonstrated an increase in perceived knowledge and documented academic productivity among early- and mid-career medical educators.
SUBMITTER: Gottlieb M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8241569 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionDespite the increasing diversity of individuals entering medicine, physicians from racial and sexual minority groups continue to experience bias and discrimination in the workplace. The objective of this study was to determine the current experiences and perceptions of discrimination on the basis of race and sexual orientation among academic emergency medicine (EM) faculty.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of EM faculty across six programs. Survey items included the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale adapted for race and sexual orientation, and the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination. Group comparisons were made using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and relationships between race or sexual orientation, and we evaluated physicians' experiences using correlation analyses.ResultsA total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Non-White physicians reported higher mean racial OGDW scores than their White counterparts (13.4 vs 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference, -7.7 - -2.9). Non-White EM faculty were also more likely to report having experienced discriminatory treatment based on race than were White EM faculty (48.0% vs 12.6%; CI for difference, 16.6% - 54.2%), although both groups were equally likely to report having observed race-based discrimination of another physician. EM faculty who identified as sexual minorities reported higher mean sexual minority OGDW scores than their heterosexual counterparts (11.1 vs 7.1; 95% CI for difference, -7.3 - -0.6). There were no significant differences between sexual minority and heterosexual faculty in their reports of experiencing or observing discrimination based on sexual orientation.ConclusionEM faculty from racial and sexual minority groups perceived more discrimination based on race or sexual orientation in their workplace than their majority counterparts. EM faculty regardless of race or sexual orientation were similar in their observations of discriminatory treatment of another physician based on race or sexual orientation.
| S-EPMC7514380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The authors conducted a prospective longitudinal study from 2009 to 2016 to assess the short and long-term impact of a formal mentorship program on junior faculty satisfaction and productivity. Junior faculty mentees enrolled in the program and junior faculty without formal mentorship were administered surveys before and after the program to assess satisfaction with their mentoring experiences. Long-term retention, promotion, and funding data were also collected. Twenty-three junior faculty mentees and 91 junior faculty controls were included in the study. Mentees came from the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Management. After participating in the mentorship program, mentees demonstrated an increase in satisfaction from baseline in five of seven domains related to mentoring, while controls experienced no significant change in satisfaction in six of the seven domains. At long-term follow up, mentees were more likely than controls to hold senior faculty positions (percent senior faculty: 47% vs. 13%, p = 0.030) despite no difference in initial administrative rank. When comparing the subset of faculty who were Instructors at baseline, mentees were more likely to be funded and/or promoted than controls (p = 0.030). A majority of mentees reported that the program strengthened their long-term success, and many maintained their original mentoring relationships and formed new ones, highlighting the strong culture of mentorship that was instilled. Several short-term and long-term benefits were fostered from this formal mentorship program. These findings highlight the potential impact of mentorship programs in propagating a culture of mentorship and excellence.
| S-EPMC6264475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesFactors influencing the employment of pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellows in a career in academic medicine versus community emergency department (ED) settings have not previously been explored. The purpose of this study was to explore PEM fellows' priorities in selecting jobs and to identify factors that influence their decisions regarding career choices through a multicenter, qualitative approach. We also explored program directors' beliefs about graduates' job selection priorities.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study among a convenience sample of PEM fellows and PEM fellowship program directors and/or associate program directors in the United States. The data were collected in 2017, using a qualitative methodology known as free listing. The fellows and program directors were solicited through the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Emergency Medicine. Using content analysis, all free-listing responses from participant samples were categorized into 14 distinct groupings. Thematic saturation was achieved, and member checking was performed to ensure trustworthiness.ResultsA sample of 63 fellows from six geographically diverse programs and 41 program and/or associate program directors were surveyed. Location, schedule/work-life balance and compensation were the most frequently cited factors taken into consideration for employment; these are not specific to PEM as a career choice. Other factors included patient population and ED resources. When deciding between academic and community employment, similar areas for the PEM physician emerged on both sides of the dichotomy: work-life balance, clinical hours, burnout, and acuity/patient complexity.ConclusionsThere are universal factors that PEM physicians consider when choosing employment. The information elicited from this exploratory technique can inform content for national survey or other qualitative work to achieve richer descriptions of reported items and dichotomies to guide fellow recruitment and retention strategies.
| S-EPMC7821075 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: The quality of care for diabetes continues to fall short of recommended guidelines and results. Models for improving the care of chronic illnesses advocate a multidisciplinary team approach. Yet little is known about the effectiveness of such models in an academic setting with a diverse patient population and resident physicians participating in clinical care. OBJECTIVE: To implement a chronic illness management (CIM) practice within an academic setting with part-time providers, and evaluate its impact on the completion of diabetes-specific care processes and on the achievement of recommended outcomes for patients with diabetes mellitus. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SUBJECTS: Patients with the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus who receive their primary care in an academic general internal medicine resident-faculty practice. MEASUREMENTS: Process and outcomes measures in patients exposed to the CIM practice were compared with non-exposed patients receiving usual care. MAIN RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-five patients met inclusion criteria. Patients in the CIM practice experienced a significant increase in completion of care processes compared to control patients for measurement of annual low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.7-5.7), urine microalbumin (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.1-5.5), blood pressure (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.8), retinal examination (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.7), foot monofilament examination (OR 4.2, 95% CI 3.0-6.1) and administration of pneumococcal vaccination (OR 5.2, 95% CI 3.0-9.3). CIM-exposed patients were also more likely to achieve improvements in clinical outcomes of glycemic and blood pressure control reflected by hemoglobin A1c less than 7.0% (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.02-3) and blood pressure less than 130/80 (OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.1-4.5) compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic chronic care model can be successfully integrated into an academic general internal medicine practice and may result in improved processes of care and some clinical outcomes for diabetic patients. This study provides a model for further hypothesis generation and more rigorous testing of the quality benefits of structured chronic illness care in diverse outpatient practices.
| S-EPMC2585684 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionDidactic lectures remain fundamental in academic medicine; however, many faculty physicians do not receive formal training in instructional delivery. In order to design a program to instill and enhance lecture skills in academic emergency medicine (EM) physicians we must first understand the gap between the current and ideal states.MethodsIn 2012 the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) Academy for Scholarship designed a novel coaching program to improve teaching skills and foster career development for medical educators based on literature review and known teaching observation programs. In order to inform the refinement of the program, we performed a needs assessment of participants. Participants' needs and prior teaching experiences were gathered from self-reflection forms completed prior to engaging in the coaching program. Two independent reviewers qualitatively analyzed data using a thematic approach.ResultsWe analyzed data from 12 self-reflection forms. Thematic saturation was reached after nine forms. Overall inter-rater agreement was 91.5%. We categorized emerging themes into three domains: participant strengths and weaknesses; prior feedback with attempts to improve; and areas of desired mentorship. Several overlapping themes and subthemes emerged including factors pertaining to the lecturer, the audience/learner, and the content/delivery.ConclusionThis study identified several areas of need from EM educators regarding lecture skills. These results may inform faculty development efforts in this area. The authors employed a three-phase, novel, national coaching program to meet these needs.
| S-EPMC6324694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Gender stereotypes in science impede supportive environments for women. Research suggests that women's perceptions of these environments are influenced by stereotype threat (ST): anxiety faced in situations where one may be evaluated using negative stereotypes. This study developed and tested ST metrics for first time use with junior faculty in academic medicine.Under a 2012 National Institutes of Health Pathfinder Award, Stanford School of Medicine's Office of Diversity and Leadership, working with experienced clinicians, social scientists, and epidemiologists, developed and administered ST measures to a representative group of junior faculty.174 School of Medicine junior faculty were recruited (62% women, 38% men; 75% assistant professors, 25% instructors; 50% white, 40% Asian, 10% underrepresented minority). Women reported greater susceptibility to ST than did men across all items including ST vulnerability (p < 0.001); rejection sensitivity (p = 0.001); gender identification (p < 0.001); perceptions of relative potential (p = 0.048); and, sense of belonging (p = 0.049). Results of career-related consequences of ST were more nuanced. Compared with men, women reported lower beliefs in advancement (p = 0.021); however, they had similar career interest and identification, felt just as connected to colleagues, and were equally likely to pursue careers outside academia (all p > 0.42).Innovative ST metrics can provide a more complete picture of academic medical center environments. While junior women faculty are susceptible to ST, they may not yet experience all of its consequences in their early careers. As such, ST metrics offer a tool for evaluating institutional initiatives to increase supportive environments for women in academic medicine.
| S-EPMC4790213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWomen comprise 28% of faculty in academic departments of emergency medicine (EM) and 11% of academic chairs. Professional development programs for women are key to career success and to prevent pipeline attrition. Within emergency medicine, there is a paucity of outcomes-level data for such programs.ObjectivesWe aim to measure the impact of a novel structured professional development curriculum and mentorship group (Resident and Faculty Female Tribe, or RAFFT) within an academic department of EM.MethodsThis prospective single-center curriculum implementation and evaluation was conducted in the academic year 2020-2021. A planning group identified potential curricular topics using an iterative Delphi process. We developed a 10-session longitudinal curriculum; a postcurriculum survey was conducted to assess the perceived benefit of the program in four domains.ResultsA total of 76% of 51 eligible women attended at least one session; for this project we analyzed the 24 participants (47%) who attended at least one session and completed both the pre- and the postsurvey. The majority of participants reported a positive benefit, which aligned with their expectations in the following areas: professional development (79.2%), job satisfaction (83.3%), professional well-being (70.8%), and personal well-being (79.2%). Resident physicians more often reported less benefit than expected compared to fellow/faculty physicians. Median perceived impact on career choice and trajectory was positive for all respondents.ConclusionsSuccess of this professional development program was measured through a perceived benefit aligning with participant expectations, a positive impact on career choice and career trajectory for participants in each career stage, and a high level of engagement in this voluntary program. Recommendations for the successful implementation of professional development programs include early engagement of stakeholders, the application of data from a program-specific needs assessment, early dissemination of session dates to allow for protected time off, and structured discussions with appropriate identification of presession resources.
| S-EPMC9222109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Retention among academic medicine faculty is problematic, and there has been a decline in the number of physicians pursuing careers in academia. The education of future physicians relies upon physicians who pursue careers in academic medicine. Therefore, efforts must be taken to increase the percentage of physicians who conduct research and/or teach medical trainees. Recognizing this need, the New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine (NYITCOM) established the Academic Medicine Scholars Program ("Scholars Program"), which was designed to prepare outstanding osteopathic medical students for a career in academic medicine. Here we aim to determine the extent to which participants in NYITCOM's Scholars Program go on to pursue research and teaching endeavors during their residency and/or fellowship programs. An anonymous survey was administered to participants in the Scholars Program from 2012 through 2018 and asked about the participants' research and teaching experiences at the following time points: during the Scholars Program, residency, and fellowship, if applicable. Participation in the program led to a significant increase in survey respondents' teaching and research skills and an increased participation in scholarly activity as compared with the national average. The results also demonstrated that the program assisted alumni in securing positions in competitive residency and fellowship programs. As residents and fellows, alumni continued to pursue scholarly endeavors, primarily by publishing abstracts and posters, attending both regional and national conferences, and delivering lectures. We are hopeful that other medical schools will take part in producing capable academic medicine physicians by incorporating a similar program into their curriculum.
| S-EPMC8368134 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment of female physicians are well documented. The #MeToo movement has brought renewed attention to these problems. This study examined academic emergency physicians' experiences with workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of emergency medicine (EM) faculty across six programs. Survey items included the following: the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale; the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination; and whether subjects had encountered unwanted sexual behaviors by a work superior or colleague in their careers. For the latter question, we asked subjects to characterize the behaviors and whether those experiences had a negative effect on their self-confidence and career advancement. We made group comparisons using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and evaluated relationships between gender and physicians' experiences using correlation analyses. RESULTS:A total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Women reported higher mean OGDW scores than men (15.4 vs 10.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.8). Female faculty were also more likely to report having experienced gender-based discriminatory treatment than male faculty (62.7% vs 12.5%; 95% CI, 35.1%-65.4%), although male and female faculty were equally likely to report having observed gender-based discriminatory treatment of another physician (64.7% vs 56.3%; 95% CI, 8.6%-25.5%). The three most frequent sources of experienced or observed gender-based discriminatory treatment were patients, consulting or admitting physicians, and nursing staff. The majority of women reported having encountered unwanted sexual behaviors in their careers, with a significantly greater proportion of women reporting them compared to men (52.9% vs 26.2%, 95% CI, 9.9%-43.4%). The majority of unwanted behaviors were sexist remarks and sexual advances. Of those respondents who encountered these unwanted behaviors, 22.9% and 12.5% reported at least somewhat negative effects on their self-confidence and career advancement. CONCLUSION:Female EM faculty perceived more gender-based discrimination in their workplaces than their male counterparts. The majority of female and approximately a quarter of male EM faculty encountered unwanted sexual behaviors in their careers.
| S-EPMC7081862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeFew researchers have explored the negotiation experiences of academic medical faculty even though negotiation is crucial to their career success. The authors sought to understand medical faculty researchers' experiences with and perceptions of negotiation.MethodBetween February 2010 and August 2011, the authors conducted semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews with 100 former recipients of National Institutes of Health mentored career development awards and 28 of their mentors. Purposive sampling ensured a diverse range of viewpoints. Multiple analysts thematically coded verbatim transcripts using qualitative data analysis software.ResultsParticipants described the importance of negotiation in academic medical careers but also expressed feeling naïve and unprepared for these negotiations, particularly as junior faculty. Award recipients focused on power, leverage, and strategy, and they expressed a need for training and mentorship to learn successful negotiation skills. Mentors, by contrast, emphasized the importance of flexibility and shared interests in creating win-win situations for both the individual faculty member and the institution. When faculty construed negotiation as adversarial and/or zero-sum, participants believed it required traditionally masculine traits and perceived women to be at a disadvantage.ConclusionsAcademic medical faculty often lack the skills and knowledge necessary for successful negotiation, especially early in their careers. Many view negotiation as an adversarial process of the sort that experts call "hard positional bargaining." Increasing awareness of alternative negotiation techniques (e.g., "principled negotiation," in which shared interests, mutually satisfying options, and fair standards are emphasized) may encourage the success of medical faculty, particularly women.
| S-EPMC3699307 | biostudies-literature