Expanded findings from a randomized controlled trial of preconception low-dose aspirin and pregnancy loss.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the association between daily preconception-initiated low-dose aspirin (LDA) treatment and very early pregnancy losses or euploid (chromosomally normal) losses among women with one to two prior losses? SUMMARY ANSWER: Daily LDA initiated preconception was not associated with the rate or type of pregnancy loss among women with a history of one to two prior pregnancy losses. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: LDA is often used to treat recurrent pregnancy loss with reductions in pregnancy loss generally only observed among women with antiphospholipid antibodies, and null associations observed among women without antiphospholipid antibodies. We previously evaluated the association between LDA and pregnancy loss overall among women with one to two prior losses in the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction (EAGeR) trial and found no association, though did not distinguish between potential effects at different stages of pregnancy loss, including implantation failure, or between euploid and aneuploid losses. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The EAGeR trial was a multi-site prospective block-randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. In total, 1228 women were randomized to daily LDA (81 mg/day) plus folic acid (400 mcg/day), or placebo plus folic acid. Participants were assigned study drug for less than or equal to six menstrual cycles or if they conceived, throughout pregnancy with study drug discontinued at 36 weeks gestation. This analysis includes additional outcome information obtained from chart abstractions after the completion of the trial, as well as testing of stored urine for measurement of hCG and detection of very early pregnancy losses, and karyotyping of the products of conception for assessment of aneuploidy of the losses. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING, METHODS: Women aged 18-40 with a history of one to two prior losses and actively trying to conceive were randomized (n = 615 LDA and n = 613 placebo) at four clinical centers in the USA (2007-2011). Log-binomial regression was used to estimate risk ratios under the intent-to-treat approach. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Daily LDA initiated preconception was not associated with clinically recognized pregnancy losses or implantation failures among women with proved fecundity and a history of one to two prior losses. Specifically, 1088 (88.6%) women completed the trial with 797 having an hCG detected pregnancy (64.9%). Overall there were 133 clinical losses (12.7% LDA versus 11.8% placebo, P = 0.71) and 55 implantation failures (5.2% LDA versus 4.9% placebo, P = 0.89). No differences were found in rate of euploid losses (RR 1.11, 95% confidence interval: 0.99, 1.26). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Generalizability of these findings is limited to women with a history of one to two prior losses, and may further be limited to women of white race with higher socioeconomic status as given the rigors of the study protocol participants tended to be white and have higher incomes and more education. We were also missing karyotype information on approximately one-third of the clinically recognized pregnancy losses, which may limit our power to detect effects on euploid losses, though detailed sensitivity analysis showed similar results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our data do not support the general use of LDA to decrease pregnancy loss and further demonstrate no increased risk of loss for women on LDA treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (Contract Nos. HHSN267200603423, HHSN267200603424, HHSN267200603426). The authors have no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT00467363. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 27 April 2007. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT: 15 June 2007.

Preconception low-dose aspirin and pregnancy outcomes: results from the EAGeR randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Preconception-initiated low-dose aspirin might positively affect pregnancy outcomes, but this possibility has not been adequately assessed. Our aim was to investigate whether low-dose aspirin improved livebirth rates in women with one to two previous pregnancy losses. METHODS: In this multicentre, block-randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, women aged 18-40 years who were attempting to become pregnant were recruited from four medical centres in the USA. Participants were stratified by eligibility criteria--the original stratum was restricted to women with one loss at less than 20 weeks' gestation during the previous year, whereas the expanded stratum included women with one to two previous losses, with no restrictions on gestational age or time of loss. Women were block-randomised by centre and eligibility stratum in a 1:1 ratio. Preconception-initiated daily low-dose aspirin (81 mg per day) plus folic acid was compared with placebo plus folic acid for up to six menstrual cycles; for women who conceived, study treatment continued until 36 weeks' gestation. Participants, trial staff, and investigators were masked to the assigned treatment. The primary outcome was livebirth rate, which was analysed by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00467363. FINDINGS: Overall, 1228 women were recruited and randomly assigned between June 15, 2007, and July 15, 2011, 1078 of whom completed the trial and were included in the analysis (535 in the low-dose aspirin group and 543 in the placebo group). 309 (58%) women in the low-dose aspirin group had livebirths, compared with 286 (53%) in the placebo group (p=0·0984; absolute difference in livebirth rate 5·09% [95% CI -0·84 to 11·02]). Pregnancy loss occurred in 68 (13%) women in the low-dose aspirin group, compared with 65 (12%) women in the placebo group (p=0·7812). In the original stratum, 151 (62%) of 242 women in the low-dose aspirin group had livebirths, compared with 133 (53%) of 250 in the placebo group (p=0·0446; absolute difference in livebirth rate 9·20% [0·51 to 17·89]). In the expanded stratum, 158 (54%) of 293 women in the low-dose aspirin group and 153 (52%) of 293 in the placebo group had livebirths (p=0·7406; absolute difference in livebirth rate 1·71% [-6·37 to 9·79]). Major adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Low-dose aspirin was associated with increased vaginal bleeding, but this adverse event was not associated with pregnancy loss. INTERPRETATION: Preconception-initiated low-dose aspirin was not significantly associated with livebirth or pregnancy loss in women with one to two previous losses. However, higher livebirth rates were seen in women with a single documented loss at less than 20 weeks' gestation during the previous year. Low-dose aspirin is not recommended for the prevention of pregnancy loss. FUNDING: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (US National Institutes of Health).

The effect of a very short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes following a previous pregnancy loss.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the relationship between a short interpregnancy interval (IPI) following a pregnancy loss and subsequent live birth and pregnancy outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: A secondary analysis of women enrolled in the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction trial with a human chorionic gonadotropin-positive pregnancy test and whose last reproductive outcome was a loss were included in this analysis (n = 677). IPI was defined as the time between last pregnancy loss and last menstrual period of the current pregnancy and categorized by 3-month intervals. Pregnancy outcomes include live birth, pregnancy loss, and any pregnancy complications. These were compared between IPI groups using multivariate relative risk estimation by Poisson regression. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were similar between IPI groups. The mean gestational age of prior pregnancy loss was 8.6 ± 2.8 weeks. The overall live birth rate was 76.5%, with similar live birth rates between those with IPI ≤3 months as compared to IPI >3 months (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.16). Rates were also similar for periimplantation loss (aRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.51-1.80), clinically confirmed loss (aRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.51-1.10), and any pregnancy complication (aRR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.71-1.09) for those with IPI ≤3 months as compared to IPI >3 months. CONCLUSION: Live birth rates and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including pregnancy loss, were not associated with a very short IPI after a prior pregnancy loss. The traditional recommendation to wait at least 3 months after a pregnancy loss before attempting a new pregnancy may not be warranted.

Recruitment for longitudinal, randomised pregnancy trials initiated preconception: lessons from the effects of aspirin in gestation and reproduction trial.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment into large, preconception randomised clinical trials (RCT) is challenging. We describe clinic and community-based preconception recruitment strategies for the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction (EAGeR) trial and highlight approaches that were and were not successful. This longitudinal RCT was conducted at four major sites in the US. Eligible women had one to two prior pregnancy losses and were actively trying to become pregnant. METHODS: Provider/clinic and community-based outreach strategies were utilised, and the recruitment rate and costs of methods were assessed. RESULTS: A screening questionnaire was completed by 5485 women; 42.4% (n = 2323) screened were initially eligible, of whom 50.7% (n = 1228) were randomised. Provider/clinic-based recruitment yielded the highest number eligible of those screened (30.1%) and also the most randomised participants overall (40.3%). The next highest yield came from direct mail and brochures/flyers at 13.1% and 12.5% of women randomised, respectively. However, direct mailings cost $720 per participant randomised. Other than word of mouth, provider/clinic-based recruitment was the most cost effective method, costing an average of $60 per randomised participant. Web-based recruitment yielded 4.7% of participants at a cost of $278 per randomised participant. CONCLUSIONS: Provider and clinic-based recruitment was the most effective and cost-efficient method of recruitment in a preconception intervention study of reproduction among women.

A randomised trial to evaluate the effects of low-dose aspirin in gestation and reproduction: design and baseline characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin (LDA) has been proposed to improve pregnancy outcomes in couples experiencing recurrent pregnancy loss. However, results from studies of LDA on pregnancy outcomes have been inconsistent, perhaps because most studies evaluated LDA-initiated post-conception. The purpose of the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction (EAGeR) trial was to determine whether preconception-initiated LDA improves livebirth rates in women with one to two prior losses. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, block randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Study participants were recruited using community-based advertisements and physician referral to four university medical centres in the US (2006-12). Eligible women were aged 18-40 years actively trying to conceive, with one to two prior losses. Participants were randomised to receive daily LDA (81 mg/day) or a matching placebo, and all were provided with daily 400-mcg folic acid. Follow-up continued for ≤6 menstrual cycles while attempting to conceive. For those who conceived, treatment was continued until 36 weeks gestation. The primary outcome was the cumulative livebirth rate over the trial period. RESULTS: There were 1228 women randomised (615 LDA, 613 placebo). Participants had a mean age of 28.7, were mostly white (95%), well educated (86% more than high school education), and employed (75%) with a household income >$100 000 annually (40%). The characteristics of those in the treatment and placebo arms were well balanced. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the study design, recruitment, data collection, and baseline characteristics of participants enrolled in EAGeR, which aimed to determine the effect of LDA on livebirth and other pregnancy outcomes in these women.

Public and Population Health in U.S. Medical Education: A Review of Guidance in Extraordinary Times.

ABSTRACT: Generations of medical educators have recommended including public and population health (PPH) content in the training of U.S. physicians. The COVID-19 pandemic, structural racism, epidemic gun violence, and the existential threats caused by climate change are currently unsubtle reminders of the essential nature of PPH in medical education and practice. To assess the state of PPH content in medical education, the authors reviewed relevant guidance, including policies, standards, and recommendations from national bodies that represent and oversee medical education for physicians with MD degrees.Findings confirm that guidance across the medical education continuum, from premedical education to continuing professional development, increasingly includes PPH elements that vary in specificity and breadth. Graduate medical education policies present the most comprehensive approach in both primary care and subspecialty fields. Behavioral, quantitative, social, and systems sciences are represented, although not uniformly, in guidance for every phase of training. Quantitative PPH skills are frequently presented in the context of research, but not in relation to the development of population health perspectives (e.g., evidence-based medicine, quality improvement, policy development). The interdependence between governmental public health and medical practice, environmental health, and the impact of structural racism and other systems of oppression on health are urgent concerns, yet are not consistently or explicitly included in curricular guidance. To prepare physicians to meet the health needs of patients and communities, educators should identify and address gaps and inconsistencies in PPH curricula and related guidance.Re-examinations of public health and health care systems in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic support the importance of PPH in physician training and practice, as physicians can help to bridge clinical and public health systems. This review provides an inventory of existing guidance (presented in the appendices) to assist educators in establishing PPH as an essential foundation of physician training and practice.

One last question: opening Pandora's box?

Family physicians are oriented and trained to inquire about the meaning of patients' symptoms and to recognize when major concerns or worry are present. Yet, in the context of busy practices and the many interruptions of our workday, we may concentrate too much on efficiency in conducting visits and completing tasks for patients, with a resulting narrow focus on the medical or biological aspects of the patient's complaint. This essay tells the story of 2 patient encounters in which I, an experienced family physician, almost missed noticing deep fears experienced by each patient. These experiences led me to reflect on the contextual, patient, and personal factors that can get in the way of recognizing and reaching a deeper understanding of patients' worries, and on the power we have to assuage fears when we address them directly instead of hesitating to open Pandora's box.

The residency program in social medicine of Montefiore Medical Center: 37 years of mission-driven, interdisciplinary training in primary care, population health, and social medicine.

Founded in 1970 to train physicians to practice in community health centers and underserved areas, the Residency Program in Social Medicine (RPSM) of Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, has graduated 562 board-eligible family physicians, general internists, and pediatricians whose careers fulfill this mission. The RPSM was a model for federal funding for primary care residency programs and has received Title VII grants during most of its history. The RPSM has tailored its mission and structured its curriculum to promote a community and population orientation and to provide the requisite knowledge and skills for integrating social medicine into clinical practice. Six unique hallmarks of RPSM training are (1) mission-oriented resident recruitment/selection and self-management, (2) interdisciplinary collaborative training among primary care professionals, (3) community-health-center-based and community-oriented primary care education, (4) biopsychosocial and ecological family systems curriculum, (5) the social medicine core curriculum and projects, and (6) grant support through Title VII. These hallmark curricular, training, and funding elements, in which population health is deeply embedded, have been carefully evaluated, regularly revised, and empirically validated since the program's inception. Practice outcomes for RPSM graduates as leaders in and advocates for population health and the care of underserved communities are described and discussed in this case study.

Women and citizenship post-trafficking: the case of Nepal.

This article analyses the relationship between gender, sexuality and citizenship embedded in models of citizenship in the Global South, specifically in South Asia, and the meanings associated with having - or not having - citizenship. It does this through an examination of women's access to citizenship in Nepal in the context of the construction of the emergent nation state in the 'new' Nepal 'post-conflict'. Our analysis explores gendered and sexualized constructions of citizenship in this context through a specific focus on women who have experienced trafficking, and are beginning to organize around rights to sustainable livelihoods and actively lobby for changes in citizenship rules which discriminate against women. Building from this, in the final section we consider important implications of this analysis of post-trafficking experiences for debates about gender, sexuality and citizenship more broadly.

Complications and Safety of Preconception Low-Dose Aspirin Among Women With Prior Pregnancy Losses.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate complications and safety of preconception low-dose aspirin in 1,228 U.S. women (2007-2011). METHODS: Evaluation of the safety of low-dose aspirin in the participants and their fetuses was a planned secondary analysis of the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction trial, a multicenter, block-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial investigating the effect of low-dose aspirin on the incidence of live birth. Women aged 18-40 years with a history of one to two pregnancy losses trying to conceive were randomized to daily low-dose aspirin (81 mg, n=615) or placebo (n=613) and were followed for up to six menstrual cycles or through gestation if they became pregnant. Emergency care visits and possible aspirin-related symptoms were assessed at each study follow-up using standardized safety interviews. In addition, complications for both the participant and her fetus or neonate were captured prospectively using case report forms, interviews conducted during pregnancy and postpartum, and medical records. RESULTS: The proportion of women with at least one possible aspirin-related symptom during the trial was similar between treatment arms (456 [74%] low-dose aspirin compared with 447 [73%] placebo, P=.65) as was the proportion with at least one emergency care visit (104 [17%] low-dose aspirin compared with 99 [16%] placebo, P=.76). Maternal complications were evenly distributed by treatment arm with the exception of vaginal bleeding, which was more commonly reported in the low-dose aspirin arm (22% compared with 17%, P=.02). The distribution of fetal and neonatal complications-which included three stillbirths, three neonatal deaths, and 10 neonates with birth defect(s)-was similar between treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Although rare but serious complications resulting from low-dose aspirin cannot be ruled out, preconception low-dose aspirin appears to be well tolerated by women trying to conceive, women who become pregnant, and by their fetuses and neonates.

Promoting Faculty Scholarship - An evaluation of a program for busy clinician-educators.

BACKGROUND: Clinician educators face barriers to scholarship including lack of time, insufficient skills, and access to mentoring. An urban department of family medicine implemented a federally funded Scholars Program to increase the participants' perceived confidence, knowledge and skills to conduct educational research. METHOD: A part-time faculty development model provided modest protected time for one year to busy clinician educators. Scholars focused on designing, implementing, and writing about a scholarly project. Scholars participated in skill seminars, cohort and individual meetings, an educational poster fair and an annual writing retreat with consultation from a visiting professor. We assessed the increases in the quantity and quality of peer reviewed education scholarship. Data included pre- and post-program self-assessed research skills and confidence and semi-structured interviews. Further, data were collected longitudinally through a survey conducted three years after program participation to assess continued involvement in educational scholarship, academic presentations and publications. RESULTS: Ten scholars completed the program. Scholars reported that protected time, coaching by a coordinator, peer mentoring, engagement of project leaders, and involvement of a visiting professor increased confidence and ability to apply research skills. Participation resulted in academic presentations and publications and new educational leadership positions for several of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: A faculty scholars program emphasizing multi-level mentoring and focused protected time can result in increased confidence, skills and scholarly outcomes at modest cost.

Sex ratio following preconception low-dose aspirin in women with prior pregnancy loss.

BACKGROUND: Several lines of evidence suggest that male embryos may have greater vulnerability than female embryos to disordered inflammation; therefore, antiinflammatory drugs, such as low-dose aspirin (LDA), may alter the sex ratio. Here, we assessed the effect of LDA on male live birth and male offspring, incorporating pregnancy losses (n = 56) via genetic assessment, as part of a parallel-design, block-randomized, placebo-controlled trial of preconception LDA. METHODS: Participants (615 treated with LDA, 613 treated with placebo) ranged in age from 18 to 40 years of age, with 1 to 2 prior pregnancy losses. We estimated the intention-to-treat (ITT) risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI and assessed interaction with baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) serum concentration - a marker of systemic inflammation. RESULTS: Among the 1,078 women who completed follow-up (535 treated with LDA, 543 treated with placebo), the male live birth ITT RR equaled 1.31 (95% CI: 1.07-1.59). With increasing tertile of hsCRP, the proportion of males at birth decreased in the placebo group, and the effect of LDA on male live birth increased (first tertile: 48% male in LDA vs. 52% in placebo, ITT RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.70-1.35; second tertile: 57% male in LDA vs. 43% in placebo, ITT RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 0.98-1.90; third tertile: 53% male in LDA vs. 35% in placebo, ITT RR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.13-2.57; P interaction = 0.03). Analysis of pregnancy with male offspring yielded similar results. CONCLUSION: Initiation of LDA prior to conception restored numbers of male live births and pregnancy with male offspring among women with 1 to 2 prior pregnancy losses. Moreover, our data suggest that LDA modulates inflammation that would otherwise reduce the conception or survival of male embryos. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00467363. FUNDING: Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.

Preconception low dose aspirin and time to pregnancy: findings from the effects of aspirin in gestation and reproduction randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the effect of preconception-initiated daily low-dose aspirin (LDA; 81 mg/day) treatment on time to pregnancy in women with a history of pregnancy loss. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, block-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Participants were block-randomized by center and eligibility stratum. SETTING: The study was conducted at four U.S.A. medical centers (2007-2012). PARTICIPANTS: Participants women aged 18-40 years actively attempting pregnancy, stratified by eligibility criteria: the "original" stratum, women with one loss <20 weeks' gestation during the previous year; and the "expanded" stratum, women with one or two previous losses of any gestational age regardless of time since loss. INTERVENTION: Daily LDA was compared with matching placebo for up to six menstrual cycles of attempting pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Time to hCG detected pregnancy and clinically confirmed pregnancy, analyzed by intention-to-treat, was measured. RESULTS: Of the 1228 women randomly assigned to LDA (n = 615) or placebo (n = 613), 410 (67%) women receiving LDA achieved pregnancy compared to 382 (63%) receiving placebo, corresponding to a fecundability odds ratio (FOR) of 1.14 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.33). Among women in the original stratum (n = 541), LDA was associated with increased fecundability compared to placebo (FOR: 1.28; 95%CI: 1.02, 1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Preconception-initiated LDA treatment resulted in a nonsignificant increase in fecundability of 14% in women with a history of 1-2 pregnancy losses, and a significant increase of 28% in women with a history of only one pregnancy loss of <20 weeks' gestation in the preceding year. Preconception-initiated LDA may increase fecundability in certain women with a recent early pregnancy loss.

Low-dose aspirin and preterm birth: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between low-dose aspirin initiated before conception and the risk of preterm birth. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction trial. Women with a history of pregnancy loss (original stratum: one loss less than 20 weeks of gestation during the previous year; expanded stratum: one or two losses with no restrictions on timing or gestational age of the losses) were randomized to either daily low-dose aspirin (81 mg, n=615) and folic acid or folic acid alone (placebo; n=613). Preterm birth was compared between groups using intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Preterm birth rates were 4.1% (22/535 low-dose aspirin) and 5.7% (31/543 placebo) (relative risk [RR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.23); spontaneous preterm birth rates were 1.1% (6/535 low-dose aspirin) and 2.2% (12/543 placebo) (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19-1.34); medically indicated preterm birth rates were 2.6% (14/535 low-dose aspirin) and 2.9% (16/543 placebo) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44-1.80). After restriction to confirmed pregnancies using inverse probability weighting, preterm birth rates were 5.7% and 9.0% (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37-1.09) and spontaneous preterm birth rates were 1.4% and 3.2% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.17-1.18). In confirmed pregnancies in the original stratum, preterm birth occurred in 3.8% and 9.7% of the low-dose aspirin and placebo groups, respectively (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.94). CONCLUSION: Preconception low-dose aspirin was not significantly associated with the overall rate of preterm birth. Although the study was underpowered for this secondary analysis, numeric trends in favor of benefit, particularly in the women with a recent, single early pregnancy loss, warrant further investigation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00467363.

Public health and medical education: a natural alliance for a new regional medical school.

A century ago, the Flexner Report challenged U.S. medical schools to critically evaluate their curricula in order to nurture physicians equipped to meet the needs of an evolving society. Recently, medical educators have been charged to increase the emphasis on prevention, care of populations, public health, and community medicine. The Commonwealth Medical College (TCMC) is a new MD-granting medical school inspired by and founded in response to a community need. The founders' vision was to recruit and train physicians to fill workforce needs in Northeast Pennsylvania. In its first few years, TCMC embarked on two major public health initiatives, the Regional Health Assessment and the Community Health Research Projects (CHRPs). The results of the health assessment have been used to guide TCMC's curricular development and research agenda. The CHRPs foster commitment to community involvement, regional engagement, and participatory research. TCMC partners with various organizations and community physicians to ensure that students learn (1) to apply knowledge and skills acquired through the course of their studies to public health research in varied settings; (2) the fundamentals of community engagement, collaboration, and service-based practice; and (3) to address the different needs of patient subgroups and populations. These programs provide opportunities for students to be active participants in community capacity building while achieving specific competencies in public health. Existing partnerships with community organizations are enhanced, strengthening the regional focus of the school. This model of incorporating public health into medical education can potentially be replicated in other institutions in the U.S. and internationally.

New medical school engages rural communities to conduct regional health assessment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Engaging communities in authentic partnerships is increasingly accepted as best practice in both medicine and public health, despite the many barriers to doing so. New medical schools have an opportunity to incorporate community engagement into their very foundation. In rural northeast Pennsylvania, a new medical school used a regional health assessment to engage community partners across the 16 counties it serves. METHODS: A community health advisory board guided the development and implementation of a key informant focus group methodology. Twenty-three focus groups were held. Themes were generated using content analysis involving 21 observers along with the principal investigators. RESULTS: A total of 221 representatives of 195 agencies from across the region participated. Twelve themes relating to needs were discussed in more than 75% of focus groups. The findings revealed barriers to improving health in the region, including lack of access to preventive services, to primary care and specialty providers, and to basic mental health services. Consistent themes related to strengths and expectations for the new medical school also emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Holding focus groups across the region allowed community service providers to connect to a new medical school, despite distances in the rural region. Partnerships with community agencies and providers are evolving. Findings from the study regarding needs and strengths in rural communities have been incorporated into the school's curriculum and research agenda. Dissemination efforts have focused on communicating findings to community partners in formats and venues that are useful for them.