Towards a common lexicon for equity, diversity, and inclusion work in academic medicine.

Differential rewarding of work and experience has been a longtime feature of academic medicine, resulting in a series of academic disparities. These disparities have been collectively called a cultural or minority "tax," and, when considered beyond academic medicine, exist across all departments, colleges, and schools of institutions of higher learning-from health sciences to disciplines located on university campuses outside of medicine and health. A shared language can provide opportunities for those who champion this work to pool resources for larger impacts across the institution. This article aims to catalog the terms used across academic medicine disciplines to establish a common language describing the inequities experienced by Black, Latinx, American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, Women, and other underrepresented people as well as queer, disabled, and other historically marginalized or excluded groups. These ideas are specific to academic medicine in the United States, although many can be used in academic medicine in other countries. The terms were selected by a team of experts in equity, diversity, and inclusion, (EDI) who are considered national thought leaders in EDI and collectively have over 100 years of scholarship and experience in this area.

An Approach to Faculty Development for Underrepresented Minorities in Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: The diversity of the US physician workforce lags significantly behind the population, and the disparities in academic medicine are even greater, with underrepresented in medicine (URM) physicians accounting for only 6.8% of all US medical school faculty. We describe a "for URM by URM" pilot approach to faculty development for junior URM Family Medicine physicians that targets unique challenges faced by URM faculty. METHODS: A year-long fellowship was created for junior URM academic clinician faculty with funding through the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine Project Fund. Seven junior faculty applied and were accepted to participate in the fellowship, which included conference calls and an in-person workshop covering topics related to writing and career advancement. RESULTS: The workshop included a mix of prepared programming on how to move from idea to project to manuscript, as well as time for spontaneous mentorship and manuscript collaboration. Key themes that emerged included how to address the high cost of the minority tax, the need for individual passion as a pathway to success, and how to overcome imposter syndrome as a hindrance to writing. CONCLUSIONS: The "for URM by URM" approach for faculty development to promote writing skills and scholarship for junior URM Family Medicine physicians can address challenges faced by URM faculty. By using a framework that includes the mentors' lived experiences and creates a psychological safe space, we can address concerns often overlooked in traditional skills-based faculty development programs.

What Do Underrepresented in Medicine Junior Family Medicine Faculty Value From a Faculty Development Experience?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: While there is increased attention to underrepresented in medicine (URiM) faculty and students, little is known about what they value in faculty development experiences. METHODS: We performed a URiM-focused, 3-day family medicine faculty development program and then collected program evaluation forms. The program evaluations had open-ended questions and a reflection on the activity. We used inductive open coding using NVivo software. We analyzed open-ended responses and reflections, and identified themes. RESULTS: Seven participants provided reflections on the workshop and responses to the evaluation forms. Analysis revealed four major themes in the learners' responses and reflections: (1) personalizing learning, (2) impacting career trajectories, (3) clarifying the writing process, and (4) creating a safe place, with frequencies of 28.2%, 26.7%, 23.6%, and 20.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although this faculty development experience was designed to teach writing skills to URiM junior faculty, their collective responses indicate that they found value beyond the skills taught and appreciated the approach taken in this activity.

Residency Training in Family Medicine: A History of Innovation and Program Support.

BACKGROUND: Residency programs have been integral to the development, expansion and progression of family medicine as a discipline. Three reports formed the foundation for graduate medical education in family medicine: Meeting the Challenge of Family Practice, The Graduate Education of Physicians, and Health is a Community Affair. In addition, the original core concepts of comprehensiveness, coordination, continuity, and patient centeredness continue to serve as the foundation for residency training in family medicine. While the Residency Review Committee for Family Medicine of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has provided the requirements for training throughout the years, key organizations including the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, and the American Board of Family Medicine have provided resources for and supported innovation in programs. Residency Program Solutions, National Institute for Program Director Development, and Family Medicine Residency Curriculum Resource are several of the resources developed by these organizations. The future of family medicine residency training should continue the emphasis on innovation and development of resources to enhance the training of residents. Areas for further development include leadership and health care systems training that allows residents to assume leadership of multidisciplinary health care teams and increase focus on the family medicine practice population as the main unit for resident education.