Dataset Information

Utilizing a Professionalism Mentor to Address Sexual Harassment in Academic Ophthalmology.

ABSTRACT: Objective This study assesses a new departmental role-a professionalism mentor-who receives sexual harassment reporting, liaisons with campus resources, and organizes educational sessions. Study Design Multicenter randomized controlled survey study. Methods Academic ophthalmology departments in the United States were randomized to a professionalism mentor group ( n = 9) and a control group ( n = 7). Among both pre- and postsurveys, 605 faculty and trainee responses were received and 546 were complete. The intervention group was assigned a professionalism mentor with educational session for a 6- to 10-month period. Sexual harassment and reporting rate change over time were compared between the two groups. Results Among 546 anonymous responses, 16% experienced workplace sexual harassment during the prior 10 months. Location in the South or Midwest was a risk factor ( p < 0.001). Victims were mostly women (76%), including residents/fellows (46%) and academic attendings (49%); perpetrators included patients (35%) and academic attendings (35%). Departments with and without a professionalism mentor had stable harassment from pre- to postsurvey ( p = 0.95 comparing change). The professionalism mentor group had an increase in reporting to an authority from pre- to postsurvey (7-23%), whereas the control group had a decrease (27-12%; p = 0.07 comparing change). Most faculty and trainees in the interventional arm of this study recommended instituting a professionalism mentor with educational session (66% presurvey and 68% postsurvey), compared with educational session alone (25% presurvey and 23% postsurvey), or neither (9% presurvey and 9% postsurvey). Residency program directors in the professionalism mentor group even more strongly supported instituting both a professionalism mentor and educational program (100% presurvey and 100% postsurvey) as opposed to educational program alone (0% presurvey and 0% postsurvey) or neither (0% presurvey and 0% postsurvey). Conclusion This study identified a high sexual harassment rate in academic ophthalmology departments over a brief period. The presence of a professionalism mentor was viewed favorably and may lead to increased reporting.

SUBMITTER: Cabrera MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9928060 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Utilizing a Professionalism Mentor to Address Sexual Harassment in Academic Ophthalmology.

Cabrera Michelle T MT Christopher Karen L KL Collins Megan E ME Ing Eliesa E Sun Grace G Pettey Jeff H JH Simon Shira S SS Sridhar Jayanth J Soohoo Jeffrey R JR Simpson Rachel G RG Ding Leona L Pineles Stacy L SL

Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) 20210101 1

Objective This study assesses a new departmental role-a professionalism mentor-who receives sexual harassment reporting, liaisons with campus resources, and organizes educational sessions. Study Design Multicenter randomized controlled survey study. Methods Academic ophthalmology departments in the United States were randomized to a professionalism mentor group ( n = 9) and a control group ( n = 7). Among both pre- and postsurveys, 605 faculty and trainee ...[more]

PMID: 37389162

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the frequency and severity of sexual harassment toward ophthalmology trainees.DesignPresent study is an anonymous retrospective online survey.ParticipantsU.S. ophthalmology residents and fellows participated in this study.MethodsSexual harassment comments directed toward University of Iowa ophthalmology trainees and faculty members were compiled. Statements were ranked by severity to develop the Iowa Verbal Sexual Harassment Scale. A brief, anonymous online survey incorporating the scale was sent to all United States ophthalmology residency program directors to distribute among trainees. Participants rated the prevalence, severity, and frequency of verbal and physical sexual harassment during training.Main outcome measuresResponse to the survey questions on the prevalence, severity, and frequency of reporting of verbal and physical sexual harassment in ophthalmology training.ResultsAmong 112 respondents (59 men and 53 women), 72 (64.3%) experienced sexual harassment in the workplace from patients (86.8% of women vs. 44.1% of men; p<0.0001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.48-2.74). Trainees rarely experienced harassment by colleagues (10.7%) or supervisors (8.9%). Women experienced more severe and frequent sexual harassment compared with men, with 54.7% women and 30.5% men experiencing sexual harassment weekly (p = 0.013, 95% CI: 1.29-5.71). Unwanted touching was the most common physical harassment type. The trainees' threshold for reporting sexual harassment was higher than their worst actual experience (p< 0.0001, F(2,282) = 67.59). Few trainees formally reported verbal (6.3%) or physical sexual harassment (1.8%). Trainees most commonly responded to harassment by redirecting the harasser (67.9%). Only 33.9% of trainees rated their institution's sexual harassment training as helpful preparation for addressing harassment.ConclusionMost ophthalmology trainees experienced sexual harassment with almost all harassment coming from patients. Female trainees reported substantially greater severity and frequency of sexual harassment. There remains an unmet need for targeted response training in ophthalmology training programs.

Project description:Background While ethics and professionalism are important components of graduate medical education, there is limited data about how ethics and professionalism curricula are taught or assessed in ophthalmology residency programs. Objective This study aimed to determine how U.S. ophthalmology residency programs teach and assess ethics and professionalism and explore trainee preparedness in these areas. Methods Directors from accredited U.S. ophthalmology residency programs completed an online survey about components of programs' ethics and professionalism teaching curricula, strategies for assessing competence, and trainee preparedness in these areas. Results Directors from 55 of 116 programs (46%) responded. The most common ethics and professionalism topics taught were informed consent (38/49, 78%) and risk management and litigation (38/49, 78%), respectively; most programs assessed trainee competence via 360-degree global evaluation (36/48, 75%). While most (46/48, 95%) respondents reported that their trainees were well or very well prepared at the time of graduation, 15 of 48 (31%) had prohibited a trainee from graduating or required remediation prior to graduation due to unethical or unprofessional conduct. Nearly every program (37/48, 98%) thought that it was very important to dedicate curricular time to teaching ethics and professionalism. Overall, 16 of 48 respondents (33%) felt that the time spent teaching these topics was too little. Conclusion Ophthalmology residency program directors recognized the importance of an ethics and professionalism curriculum. However, there was marked variation in teaching and assessment methods. Additional work is necessary to identify optimal strategies for teaching and assessing competence in these areas. In addition, a substantial number of trainees were prohibited from graduating or required remediation due to ethics and professionalism issues, suggesting an impact of unethical and unprofessional behavior on resident attrition.

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.

Project description:ImportanceThe culture of academic medicine may foster mistreatment that disproportionately affects individuals who have been marginalized within a given society (minoritized groups) and compromises workforce vitality. Existing research has been limited by a lack of comprehensive, validated measures, low response rates, and narrow samples as well as comparisons limited to the binary gender categories of male or female assigned at birth (cisgender).ObjectiveTo evaluate academic medical culture, faculty mental health, and their relationship.Design, setting, and participantsA total of 830 faculty members in the US received National Institutes of Health career development awards from 2006-2009, remained in academia, and responded to a 2021 survey that had a response rate of 64%. Experiences were compared by gender, race and ethnicity (using the categories of Asian, underrepresented in medicine [defined as race and ethnicity other than Asian or non-Hispanic White], and White), and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) status. Multivariable models were used to explore associations between experiences of culture (climate, sexual harassment, and cyber incivility) with mental health.ExposuresMinoritized identity based on gender, race and ethnicity, and LGBTQ+ status.Main outcomes and measuresThree aspects of culture were measured as the primary outcomes: organizational climate, sexual harassment, and cyber incivility using previously developed instruments. The 5-item Mental Health Inventory (scored from 0 to 100 points with higher values indicating better mental health) was used to evaluate the secondary outcome of mental health.ResultsOf the 830 faculty members, there were 422 men, 385 women, 2 in nonbinary gender category, and 21 who did not identify gender; there were 169 Asian respondents, 66 respondents underrepresented in medicine, 572 White respondents, and 23 respondents who did not report their race and ethnicity; and there were 774 respondents who identified as cisgender and heterosexual, 31 as having LGBTQ+ status, and 25 who did not identify status. Women rated general climate (5-point scale) more negatively than men (mean, 3.68 [95% CI, 3.59-3.77] vs 3.96 [95% CI, 3.88-4.04], respectively, P < .001). Diversity climate ratings differed significantly by gender (mean, 3.72 [95% CI, 3.64-3.80] for women vs 4.16 [95% CI, 4.09-4.23] for men, P < .001) and by race and ethnicity (mean, 4.0 [95% CI, 3.88-4.12] for Asian respondents, 3.71 [95% CI, 3.50-3.92] for respondents underrepresented in medicine, and 3.96 [95% CI, 3.90-4.02] for White respondents, P = .04). Women were more likely than men to report experiencing gender harassment (sexist remarks and crude behaviors) (71.9% [95% CI, 67.1%-76.4%] vs 44.9% [95% CI, 40.1%-49.8%], respectively, P < .001). Respondents with LGBTQ+ status were more likely to report experiencing sexual harassment than cisgender and heterosexual respondents when using social media professionally (13.3% [95% CI, 1.7%-40.5%] vs 2.5% [95% CI, 1.2%-4.6%], respectively, P = .01). Each of the 3 aspects of culture and gender were significantly associated with the secondary outcome of mental health in the multivariable analysis.Conclusions and relevanceHigh rates of sexual harassment, cyber incivility, and negative organizational climate exist in academic medicine, disproportionately affecting minoritized groups and affecting mental health. Ongoing efforts to transform culture are necessary.

Dataset Information

Utilizing a Professionalism Mentor to Address Sexual Harassment in Academic Ophthalmology.

Publications

Utilizing a Professionalism Mentor to Address Sexual Harassment in Academic Ophthalmology.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets