Perceptions of Lactation Experience Among Neurology Faculty and Impact of Lactation Time on Academic Achievement at U.S. Academic Medical Centers.

Objective: To investigate the perceptions of lactation experiences of neurology faculty and the impact of lactation time on academic achievement. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study utilizing a survey administered across 19 academic neurology centers in the United States. Respondents self-identified as having children and answered questions about lactation at work. Demographic information; academic achievement including publications, guest speakerships, awards, leadership roles, and funding; and perception of lactation experience were analyzed. Results: Among 162 respondents, 83% took lactation time at work. Thirty-seven percent reported lack of employer support for lactation, 46% were dissatisfied with their lactation experience, 59% did not receive compensation for lactation time, 62% did not have blocked clinical time, 73% reported relative value units were not adjusted to accommodate lactation, and 43% reported lack of access to private lactation space. Women spent on average 9.5 months lactating per child and desired 2.4 further months of lactation. There was no difference in all measures of self-reported academic achievement between women who did and did not take lactation time when measured across all career stages. Conclusions: Although a majority of respondents took lactation time at work, perceptions of employer support for lactation were low, and expectations for work productivity were not adjusted to accommodate lactation time. Taking lactation time at work did not decrease self-reported academic achievement. System-level best practices designed to support lactating faculty should be developed to guide academic institutions.

Institutional Culture of Belonging and Attrition Risk Among Women Health Care Professionals.

Objective: Attrition of women health care professionals is high, threatening patient care and advances in health care sciences. Women health care professionals have often reported experiencing challenges in the workplace that lower their sense of belonging and may precipitate their attrition. The current study sought to identify dimensions of workplace belonging in women health care professionals and to determine the relative strength of association of these belonging dimensions with intent to leave (ITL) their institution. Methods: Attendees of a continuing education course on women's leadership skills in health care were surveyed about their ITL and workplace belonging experiences. Dimensions of workplace belonging were identified by factor analysis. The strength of association between ITL and each workplace belonging dimension, as well as their relative strengths of association, were assessed in ordinal regression analyses. Results: Women comprised 99% of survey participants. Three dimensions of workplace belonging were identified: "institutional culture," "interactions with supervisor," and "interpersonal relationships." More frequent experiences of support in any of the three belonging dimensions associated strongly with lower ITL. When all three belonging dimensions were considered simultaneously, ITL remained strongly related with experiences of a supportive "institutional culture" (odds ratio 0.41, p < 0.0001), while it became much less strongly related with supportive experiences in the other two dimensions. Conclusions: These findings suggest a dominant role of institutional culture in attrition risk in women health care professionals. Interventions that foster an institutional culture of diversity, opportunities for career advancement, and inclusivity might be effective in improving retention of women health care professionals.

Analysis of Gender Discrepancies in Leadership Roles and Recognition Awards in the Child Neurology Society.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Gender disparities have been demonstrated across several medical specialties, including neurology. Although women have comprised most of the child neurology trainees since 2007, it is not apparent whether this demographic shift is reflected in the Child Neurology Society (CNS) awards and leadership. This study aimed to evaluate the differences in gender representation among leadership positions and award recipients within the CNS. The primary outcome measure was the total number of board of director (BOD) positions or awards given by gender each year. METHODS: A retrospective review of publicly available data was conducted on CNS members, post-training award recipients, and BOD positions, including nomination records, from 1972 to 2023. Data abstracted were restricted to gender to preserve member and nominee anonymity. Gender identification and consensus were determined through a combination of strategies and study members. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson χ2 test, and the exact binomial test to compare gender proportions and the probability of being underrepresented in awards, leadership, and nominations over time. Data are presented according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. RESULTS: From 1972 to 2023, women represented 29% (44/152) of the BOD positions and 26% (61/236) of post-training award recipients presented by the CNS. Despite the increase in the proportion of women in child neurology, the overall gap in gender representation in leadership positions remains broadly stable. Only 13% (4/32) of CNS presidents have been women, a significant underrepresentation (95% CI 2.3%-52%, p < 0.004), although the representation of women in nonpresidential positions increased from 2003 to 2023. Women are also underrepresented as overall awardees (95% CI 12%-38%, p < 0.00001) except for the Philip R. Dodge Young Investigator Award, which is an investigator-initiated application. DISCUSSION: Women remain underrepresented at the highest levels of recognition in child neurology despite representing most of the field. Reasons for disparities are known to be multifactorial and likely include gender bias and structural sexism. We present several discussion topics that seek to rationalize this disparity and provide suggestions for improving diversity, equity, and inclusion for leadership roles and awards.

Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education and Mentoring in Rehabilitation Medicine.

ABSTRACT: Artificial intelligence emerges as a transformative force, offering novel solutions to enhance medical education and mentorship in the specialty of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Artificial intelligence is a transformative technology that is being adopted in nearly every industry. In medicine, the use of artificial intelligence in medical education is growing. Artificial intelligence may also assist with some of the challenges of mentorship, including the limited availability of experienced mentors, and the logistical difficulties of time and geography are some constraints of traditional mentorship. In this commentary, we discuss various models of artificial intelligence in medical education and mentoring, including expert systems, conversational agents, and hybrid models. These models enable tailored guidance, broaden outreach within the physical medicine and rehabilitation community, and support continuous learning and development. Balancing artificial intelligence's technical advantages with the essential human elements while addressing ethical considerations, artificial intelligence integration into medical education and mentorship presents a paradigm shift toward a more accessible, responsive, and enriched experience in rehabilitation medicine.

Analysis of Faculty Gender and Race in Scholarly Achievements in Academic Neurology.

Background: Intersection of gender and race and/or ethnicity in academic medicine is understudied; we aim to understand these factors in relation to scholarly achievements for neurology faculty. Methods: Faculty from 19 US neurology departments completed a survey (2021-2022) to report rank, leadership positions, publications, funded projects, awards, and speaker invitations. Regression analyses examined effects of gender, race, and their intersectionality on these achievements. Women, Black/Indigenous/People of Color (BIPOC), and BIPOC women were comparator groups. Results: Four hundred sixty-two faculty responded: 55% women, 43% men; 31% BIPOC, 63% White; 21% BIPOC women, 12% BIPOC men, 36% White women, 31% White men. Men and White faculty are more likely to be full professors than women and BIPOC faculty. The number of leadership positions, funded projects, awards, and speaker invitations are significantly greater in White compared to BIPOC faculty. Relative to BIPOC women, the number of leadership positions is significantly higher among BIPOC men, White women, and White men. Publication numbers for BIPOC men are lower, number of funded projects and speaker invitations for White women are higher, and number of awards among White men and White women is higher compared to BIPOC women. Discussion: Our study highlights that inequities in academic rank, award number, funded projects, speakership invitations, and leadership roles disproportionately impacted BIPOC women. More studies are needed to evaluate gender and race and/or ethnicity intersectionality effects on faculty achievements, reasons for inequities, recognition, and potential solutions.

Gender Differences in the Path to Medical School Deanship.

Importance: Women account for only 28% of current US medical school deans. Studying the differences between women and men in their preparation to becoming deans might help to explain this discrepancy. Objective: To identify differences in the leadership development experiences between women and men in their ascent to the medical school deanship. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, volunteers from the roster of the Association of American Medical Colleges Council of Deans were solicited and interviewed from June 15 to November 9, 2023. Women deans were recruited first, then men who had been appointed to their deanships at a similar time to their women counterparts were recruited. Deans were interviewed on topics related to number of applications for deanships, prior leadership roles, leadership development, personal factors, and career trajectories. Interviews were coded, and themes were extracted through conventional content analysis. Main Outcome and Measures: Career and leadership development experiences were elicited using a semistructured interview guide. Results: We interviewed 17 women and 17 men deans, representing 25.8% (34 of 132) of the total population of US medical school deans. Most deans (23 [67.6%]) practiced a medicine-based specialty or subspecialty. No statistically significant differences were found between women and men with regard to years to attain deanship (mean [SD], 2.7 [3.4] vs 3.7 [3.7] years), years as a dean (mean [SD], 5.7 [5.2] vs 6.0 [5.0] years), highest salary during career (mean [SD], $525 769 [$199 936] vs $416 923 [$195 848]), or medical school rankings (mean [SD], 315.5 [394.5] vs 480.5 [448.9]). Their reports indicated substantive gender differences in their paths to becoming a dean. Compared with men, women deans reported having to work harder to advance, while receiving less support and opportunities for leadership positions by their own institutions. Subsequently, women sought leadership development from external programs. Women deans also experienced gender bias when working with search firms. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study of US medical school deans found that compared with men, women needed to be more proactive, had to participate in external leadership development programs, and had to confront biases during the search process. For rising women leaders, this lack of support had consequences, such as burnout and attrition, potentially affecting the makeup of future generations of medical school deans. Institutional initiatives centering on leadership development of women is needed to mitigate the gender biases and barriers faced by aspiring women leaders.

Analysis of Pediatric Clinical Practice Guideline Authors by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity.

Background and Objectives: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have significantly influenced medical practice worldwide. Nevertheless, the authorship of CPGs produced by several medical societies has not been representative of the field and population they address, as women and individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups have been underrepresented as authors. We hypothesized that women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups would also be underrepresented as authors of CPGs produced by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the gender, race, and ethnic composition of authors and subcommittee participants of AAP-produced CPGs published from January 2010 through May 2023 were analyzed and compared to the 2010 and 2021 U.S. population and 2010 and 2022 U.S. medical school pediatric faculty. Results: Women (39.7%, 127/320 of all positions, and 42.5%, 85/200 of named author positions) and women physicians (35.2%, 101/287 of all positions, and 36.4%, 64/176 of named author positions) were significantly underrepresented-while men and men physicians were significantly overrepresented-from their respective composition in the U.S. Census and pediatric faculty. Women and women physicians from all racial and ethnic groups and men and men physicians from minority racial and ethnic groups were significantly underrepresented-from their respective composition in the U.S. Census and pediatric faculty. No Black man was identified as an author. Conclusions: Medical societies that produce CPGs should be cognizant of these inequities and ensure appropriate authorship diversity.

Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Participants in Clinical Trials Focused on Chronic Pain.

There is limited data on equitable inclusion in chronic pain trials. We aimed to 1) identify the frequency of reporting age, race, ethnicity, and sex in clinical trials targeting chronic pain, and 2) compare sociodemographic representation to the United States (US) population. We examined US-based intervention trials for chronic pain initiated between 2007 and 2021 and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. We 1) assessed the frequency of reporting each demographic variable, 2) compared representation with US population estimates, and 3) explored change in reporting over time. Of 501 clinical trials, the frequency of reporting was as follows: 36.9% reported older adults, 54.3% reported race, 37.4% reported ethnicity, and 100% reported sex. Rates of race and ethnicity reporting increased, but older adult age reporting decreased over time (ps < .00001). Compared to 2020 US population estimates, there was an equitable representation of older adults, under-representation of individuals identifying as American Indian or Alaska Native (.8% vs .6%), Asian (5.6% vs 2.9%), Black or African American (12.6% vs 12.2%), with more than one race (2.9% vs 1.2%), and Hispanic/Latino (16.9% vs 14.1%). There was an over-representation of individuals identifying as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (.2% vs .5%) or White (70.4% vs 72.9%), and of females (50.8% vs 68.4%). Some representation rates varied by chronic pain condition. Reporting of older adult age, race, and ethnicity was low in chronic pain trials in ClinicalTrials.gov, reinforcing the need for adhering to reporting guidelines. Representation varied across trials compared with US population data, particularly among those identifying as Hispanic/Latino and certain minority racial groups. PERSPECTIVE: Despite initiatives to increase the reporting of demographic information, doing so in clinical pain trials is far from ubiquitous. Moreover, efforts to improve diversity in these trials continue to be insufficient. Indeed, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) remain under-represented in clinical pain trials.

Individual, organizational, and policy strategies to enhance the retention and a sense of belonging for health care professionals in rehabilitation medicine.

The retention of physicians and other health care professionals in rehabilitation medicine is a critical issue that affects patients' access to care and the quality of the care they receive. In the United States and globally, there are known shortages of clinicians including, but not limited to, physicians, nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and speech-language pathologists. These shortages are predicted to worsen in the future. It is known that attrition occurs in a variety of ways such as a clinician reducing work hours or effort, taking a position at another organization, leaving the field of medicine altogether, stress-related illness, and suicide. Retention efforts should focus on stay factors by creating a positive culture that supports a sense of belonging as well as addressing a myriad of push and pull factors that lead to attrition. In this commentary, we provide a roadmap that includes examples of stay strategies for individuals and organizations to adopt that are aimed at enhancing the retention of rehabilitation medicine professionals.

Gender Representation on Editorial Boards of JAMA Network Journals.

Objective: Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards of biomedical journals has occurred for decades. The JAMA Network Journals have substantial and broad impact on advances in the biomedical sciences. We sought to determine the current status of gender representation on editorial boards of the 12 JAMA Network Journals. Methods: The gender of each editorial board member of the 12 JAMA Network Journals was classified based on review of online sources. The percentage of women on each board (i.e., number of women relative to total members) was calculated and compared to gender equity and parity benchmarks. The gender equity benchmark for each journal was defined as the percentage of women physicians in the medical specialty reflecting the journal's content based on Association of American Medical Colleges data. The gender parity benchmark for all journals was defined as 50% women. Results: There was considerable variation in the representation of women on the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals relative to gender equity and parity benchmarks. Women were underrepresented on 50% (6 of 12) of boards relative to gender equity and 67% (8 of 12) of boards relative to gender parity. Conclusions: Women were found to be underrepresented on 50% or more of the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals. This finding reflects gender inequities in academic publishing and the broader biomedical enterprise, which limits advances in the biomedical sciences and health care. Those JAMA Network Journals that continue to underrepresent women on their editorial boards are urged to remediate this longstanding issue.

Prehabilitation in radiation therapy: a scoping review.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Radiation therapy (RT) is a central component of cancer treatment with survival and long-term quality-of-life benefits across a spectrum of oncologic diagnoses. However, RT has been associated with varying levels of fatigue, pain, weight loss, and changes in mental health both during and post-treatment. Prehabilitation aims to optimize health prior to anti-neoplastic therapy in order to reduce side effects, increase adherence to treatment, expedite post-treatment recovery, and improve long-term outcomes. Though prehabilitation has been studied in those undergoing cancer-related surgery, literature on prehabilitation in individuals undergoing RT has not been comprehensively explored. Thus, this scoping review aims to summarize the existing literature focused on prehabilitation interventions for patients receiving RT. MATERIALS/METHODS: The PRISMA-ScR checklist for conducting scoping reviews was adopted to identify and evaluate studies investigating the efficacy of prehabilitation before and during RT for cancer over the past 21 years (10/2002-10/2022). A search of prehabilitation and RT was performed to identify studies investigating prehabilitation interventions in adult cancer patients undergoing RT. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles met inclusion criteria, yielding 3657 total participants. Eighteen (60%) studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sample sizes ranging from 21 to 221. The most commonly studied populations were patients with head and neck cancer, followed by rectal, breast, and lung cancer. A majority (80%) of studies evaluated one prehabilitation intervention (i.e., unimodal). Targeted physical exercises were the most common intervention, followed by general physical exercises and technology/apps. Adherence/feasibility was the most common primary outcome, representing 30% of studies. All studies reported data on sex, and 5 (17%) reported data on race and/or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation interventions have been successfully implemented in patients with cancer undergoing surgical treatment. Based on limited current literature, prehabilitation appears to have a promising effect in reducing morbidity in adult cancer patients requiring RT. Though our review identified many RCTs, they were frequently small sample trials with primary outcomes focused on feasibility, rather than functional status or quality of life. Thus, there is a need for adequately powered, randomized controlled intervention trials to investigate the efficacy of prehabilitation and maximize the treatment outcomes for patients undergoing RT.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Curriculum Embedded in a Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Residency Program.

ABSTRACT: Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are continuing to have increased importance in medical training, including rehabilitation medicine. Although resident-led curricula have been integrated into medical education in other training programs, to our knowledge, this the first report focusing on integrating these topics into resident education for a physical medicine and rehabilitation program. We created a didactic curriculum for our rehabilitation residents that included: quarterly lectures on diversity, equity, and inclusion topics followed by small group discussions. Each session also included an article that was included in the discussion. The sessions used both anonymous presurvey and postsurvey data to assess the efficacy of our initiative. Our initial data showed that our quarterly sessions created a safe and comfortable environment for discussing diversity, equity, and inclusion topics. In addition, our session specific data supported that increased awareness of diversity, equity, and inclusion disparities with rehabilitation and medicine was achieved. Our committee used the data and feedback to create further iterations of this initiative within our program, and we believe that this is a model that can be adopted by other physical medicine and rehabilitation residencies.