Toward realizing diversity in academic medicine

Stanford Network for Advancement and Promotion: The impact of a community building-focused leadership development program on the success of underrepresented groups in academic medicine

BACKGROUND

Leadership can be an isolating experience and leaders from underrepresented groups (URGs) may experience even greater isolation and vulnerability because of lack of representation. Given the collaborative nature of medicine, leadership programs for physicians need to address isolation. Social support is one mechanism to combat this isolation; however, most leadership programs focus exclusively on skills building.

PURPOSE

The Stanford Network for Advancement and Promotion (SNAP) program was developed to reduce isolation among physician leaders from URGs in academic medicine leadership by building a supportive network of peers.

METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Ten women physicians from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds were invited to participate in SNAP. Annual surveys were administered to participants to assess the effectiveness of SNAP on decreasing feelings of isolation and increasing professional leadership growth. The authors charted the expansion and adaptation of the program model across gender and in additional settings.

RESULTS

SNAP effectively created a sense of community among the physician leaders. Participants also reported feeling challenged by the program and that they had grown in terms of critical thinking, organizational knowledge, and empowerment as leaders. Participants found community building to be the most valuable program component. Because of this success, the SNAP model has been adapted to create 10 additional cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Leadership programs like SNAP that focus on reducing isolation are instrumental for retaining and promoting the career advancement of physicians from URGs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Developing a diverse workforce of academic physicians is essential to providing high-quality and equitable clinical care, research, and medical education.

Staying Virtual: A Survey Study of the Virtual Lecture Experience in Academic Medicine

BACKGROUND

Increasing clinical demands can adversely impact academic advancement, including the ability to deliver lectures and disseminate scholarly work. The virtual lecture platform became mainstream during the height of the coronavirus-19 pandemic. Lessons learned from this period may offer insight into supporting academic productivity among physicians who must balance multiple demands, including high clinical workloads and family care responsibilities. We evaluated perceptions on delivering virtual lectures to determine whether virtual venues merit continuation beyond the pandemic's initial phase and whether these perceptions differ by gender and rank.

METHODS

In a survey study, faculty who spoke in 1 of 3 virtual lecture programs in the Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Otolaryngology, and Radiology at a university hospital in 2020 to 2022 were queried about their experience. Speakers' motivations to lecture virtually and the perceived advantages and disadvantages of virtual and in-person lectures were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses.

RESULTS

Seventy-two of 95 (76%) faculty members responded (40% women, 38% men, and 22% gender undisclosed). Virtual lectures supported the speakers "a lot" to "extremely" with the following goals: enhancing one's reputation and credibility (76%), networking (70%), receiving feedback (63%), and advancing prospects for promotion (59%). Virtual programs also increased the speakers' sense of accomplishment (70%) and professional optimism (61%) by at least "a lot," including instructors and assistant professors who previously had difficulty obtaining invitations to speak outside their institution. Many respondents had declined prior invitations to speak in-person due to clinical workload (66%) and family care responsibilities (58%). Previous opportunities to lecture in-person were also refused due to finances (39%), teaching (26%), and research (19%) requirements, personal medical conditions or disabilities (9%), and religious obligations (5%). Promotion was a stronger motivating factor to lecture virtually for instructors and assistant professors than for associate and full professors. By contrast, disseminating work and ideas was a stronger motivator for associate and full professors. Associate and full professors also reported greater improvement in work-related well-being than earlier career faculty from the virtual lecture experience. Very few differences were found by gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual lecture programs support faculty who might not otherwise have the opportunity to lecture in-person due to multiple constraints. To increase the dissemination of scholarly work and expand opportunities to all faculty, virtual lectures should continue even as in-person venues are reestablished.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Efforts at a Departmental Level: Building a Committee as a Vehicle for Advancing Progress

Academic Health Centers (AHCs) across the nation are experiencing a reawakening to the importance of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). Such work impacts both employees and patients served by healthcare institutions. Yet, for departments without previously existing formal channels for this work, it is not always apparent where to begin. The current manuscript details a process for creating a committee as a vehicle for championing DEI efforts at the department level within an AHC. The authors present a six-step model for forming a DEI Committee and progress monitoring measures to remain accountable to identified objectives. In each step, the authors provide examples of their work with the goal for readers to tailor and apply each step to their own departments' DEI efforts. The current paper also identifies lessons learned with regard to barriers and facilitators of department-level DEI work. Reflections and next steps for DEI work beyond the proposed model are also discussed.

A global view of the aspiring physician-scientist

Physician-scientists have epitomized the blending of deep, rigorous impactful curiosity with broad attention to human health for centuries. While we aspire to prepare all physicians with an appreciation for these skills, those who apply them to push the understanding of the boundaries of human physiology and disease, to advance treatments, and to increase our knowledge base in the arena of human health can fulfill an essential space for our society, economies, and overall well-being. Working arm in arm with basic and translational scientists as well as expert clinicians, as peers in both groups, this career additionally serves as a bridge to facilitate the pace and direction of research that ultimately impacts health. Globally, there are remarkable similarities in challenges in this career path, and in the approaches employed to overcome them. Herein, we review how different countries train physician-scientists and suggest strategies to further bolster this career path.

Equity, diversity and inclusion of pediatric clinician-scientists in Canada: a thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

Underrepresented voices and perspectives are missing from academic and clinical health sciences. We aimed to define the unique opportunities and challenges of pediatric clinician-scientists related to equity, diversity and inclusion; and to identify key components of training needed to support people from equity-seeking groups as emerging and early-career pediatric clinician-scientists to generate diverse health research leaders in knowledge generation, implementation and translation.

METHODS

Using a qualitative descriptive approach, we examined the experiences of clinician stakeholders. Semistructured interviews were conducted with pediatric clinician-scientist stakeholders. Thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

We interviewed a total of 39 individuals. Our analysis resulted in 4 interrelated themes: the pervasiveness and invisibility of sexism; the invisibility and visibility of racism; proposed individual-level solutions to the sexism and racism; and proposed institutional and system-level changes to address the porous and leaky pipeline. These themes acknowledged that, ultimately, system change is required for addressing equity, diversity and inclusion in clinical and academic training environments.

INTERPRETATION

These findings highlight the importance of addressing systemic biases that limit the inclusion of women and racialized individuals in pediatric clinician-scientist careers. Further research is needed to explore the problem of exclusion, which will, in turn, inform education of pediatric clinician-scientists and inform better ways to promote equity, diversity and inclusivity; these steps are needed to foster systemic change in the cultures that perpetuate exclusivity in both academic and clinical communities.

Institutional solutions addressing disparities in compensation and advancement of emergency medicine physicians: A critical appraisal of gaps and associated recommendations

BACKGROUND

Disparities in salary and advancement of emergency medicine (EM) faculty by race and gender have been consistently demonstrated for over three decades. Prior studies have largely focused on individual-level solutions. To identify systems-based interventions, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) formed the Research Equity Task Force in 2018 with members from multiple academies (the Academy of Academic Chairs in Emergency Medicine [AACEM], the Academy of Academic Administrators in Emergency Medicine [AAAEM], the Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine [AWAEM], and the Academy for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Medicine [ADIEM]) and sought recommendations from EM departmental leaders.

METHODS

The task force conducted interviews containing both open-ended narrative and closed-ended questions in multiple phases. Phase 1 included a convenience sample of chairs of EM departments across the United States, and phase 2 included vice-chairs and other faculty who lead promotion and advancement. The task force identified common themes from the interviews and then developed three-tiered sets of recommendations (minimal, target, and aspirational) based on participant responses. In phase 3, iterative feedback was collected and implemented on these recommendations from study participants and chairs participating in a national AACEM webinar.

RESULTS

In findings from 53 interviews of chairs, vice-chairs, and faculty leaders from across the United States, we noted heterogeneity in the faculty development and promotion processes across institutions. Four main themes were identified from the interviews: the need for a directed, structured promotion process; provision of structured mentorship; clarity on requirements for promotion within tracks; and transparency in salary structure. Recommendations were developed to address gaps in structured mentorship and equitable promotion and compensation.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations for AEM departments have the potential to increase structured mentorship programs, improve equity in promotion and advancement, and reduce disparities in the AEM workforce. These recommendations have been endorsed by SAEM, AACEM, AWAEM, ADIEM, and AAAEM.

Diversity in Academic Laryngology: An Evaluation of Academic Advancement and Research Productivity

BACKGROUND

Diversity within the medical profession with respect to sex and racial minorities has been shown to have a positive effect on health and healthcare. Characterization of a field is key to evaluating trends and the advancement of diversity in an otolaryngology subspecialty.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.

METHODS

A comprehensive list of all the academic laryngologists was compiled from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited otolaryngology residency programs in 2020. The last 20 past presidents of the American Laryngological Association (ALA) and American Broncho-Esophogological Association (ABEA) were analyzed. Academic rank and years in practice were determined from departmental websites, with online search tools used as secondary resources. The h-index was utilized as a measure of research productivity. Regression analysis was performed to analyze these variables.

RESULTS

There are 184 academic laryngologists in the 124 programs. The majority of the population is Caucasian 76.6% (141/184), followed by Asian 16.3% (30/184), African American 4.34% (8/184), and then Hispanic 1% (2/184). There are 47 full professors with 83% Caucasian, 14.1% Asian, and 2.1% African American and 91.5% male and only 8.5% female. Past ALA presidents were 90% male and for the ABEA 75% male. H-index revealed a statistically significant difference between Caucasian and African American colleagues [P value (<.0005)].

CONCLUSIONS

Minorities are disproportionately underrepresented in laryngology. Women are less likely to be in leadership roles in laryngology and become full professors. Laryngology lags behind other surgical specialties in the representation of minorities and women. Continued efforts should be made to increase diversity in the field of laryngology, especially in regard to underrepresented minorities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 2021.