Storylines of family medicine II: foundational building blocks-context, community and health.

Storylines of Family Medicine is a 12-part series of thematically linked mini-essays with accompanying illustrations that explore the many dimensions of family medicine, as interpreted by individual family physicians and medical educators in the USA and elsewhere around the world. In 'II: foundational building blocks-context, community and health', authors address the following themes: 'Context-grounding family medicine in time, place and being', 'Recentring community', 'Community-oriented primary care', 'Embeddedness in practice', 'The meaning of health', 'Disease, illness and sickness-core concepts', 'The biopsychosocial model', 'The biopsychosocial approach' and 'Family medicine as social medicine.' May readers grasp new implications for medical education and practice in these essays.

SHARPening Residency Selection: Implementing a Systematic Holistic Application Review Process.

PROBLEM: Traditional metrics used in residency application review processes are systematically biased against applicants from minoritized communities that are underrepresented in medicine (URiM). These biases harm not just URiM applicants but also residency programs and patients. Although several residency programs have implemented holistic reviews to mitigate these biases, few tested tools exist that can be adapted and implemented in a wide variety of settings within academic medicine. APPROACH: This article describes advances made in the third year of a longitudinal, ongoing quality improvement project that used the A3 framework to improve recruitment of URiM residents to a family medicine residency program. The authors devised a systematic holistic application review process (SHARP) to determine which applicants to invite to interview with the program. SHARP's development began in August 2019, and after significant discussion with program leadership and iterations of rubric refinement, the program adopted SHARP in September 2020 to review applications for the 2021 application cycle. OUTCOMES: Compared with the 2016 to 2020 period before SHARP implementation, data from the 2021 and 2022 residency application cycles after SHARP implementation showed a significant increase in the proportion of interviewed candidates who identify as URiM (from 23% to 38%, P < .001) and matched candidates who identify as URiM (from 27% to 62%, P = .004). There was also a notable increase in the number and diversity of reviewers who evaluated applicants to the program. NEXT STEPS: SHARP is a promising tool to mitigate the effects of racism and other biases against URiM applicants to residency programs. Residency programs across specialties may benefit from adopting SHARP and adapting it based on their own goals and priorities.

Moving upstream: healthcare partnerships addressing social determinants of health through community wealth building.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-based interventions addressing social needs such as food and housing generally fail to impact the upstream wealth and power inequities underlying those needs. However, a small number of US healthcare organizations have begun addressing these upstream inequities by partnering with community wealth building initiatives. These initiatives include community land trusts, resident-owned communities, and worker cooperatives, which provide local residents ownership and control over their housing and workplaces. While these partnerships represent a novel, upstream approach to the social determinants of health, no research has yet evaluated them. METHODS: To assess the current state and key aspects of healthcare-community wealth building partnerships, we conducted a multiple case study analysis using semi-structured interviews with thirty-eight key informants across ten partnerships identified through the Healthcare Anchor Network. To analyze the interviews, we used a two-stage coding process. First, we coded responses based on the phase of the intervention to which they corresponded: motivation, initiation, implementation, or evaluation. Then we assessed responses within each aspect for common themes and variation on salient topics. RESULTS: Partnerships were generally motivated by a combination of community needs, such as affordable housing and living wage jobs, and health system interests, such as workforce housing and supply chain resilience. Initiating projects required identifying external partners, educating leadership, and utilizing risk mitigation strategies to obtain health system buy-in. Implementation took various forms, with healthcare organizations providing financial capital in the form of grants and loans, social capital in the form of convening funders and other stakeholders, and/or capacity building support in the form of strategic planning or technical assistance resources. To evaluate projects, healthcare organizations used more process and community-level metrics rather than metrics based on individual health outcomes or returns on investment. Based on best practices from each partnership phase, we provide a roadmap for healthcare organizations to develop effective community wealth building partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing healthcare partnerships with community wealth building organizations yields key strategies healthcare organizations can use to develop more effective partnerships to address the upstream causes of poor health.