Strategies for forming effective women's groups.

Women are under-represented at the highest levels of leadership in health care, so many institutions have started forming "women in medicine" affinity groups. In this The Clinical Teacher's Toolbox, we review the history of women's professional peer-to-peer networking groups in health care, describe the rationale for establishing a women's group, discuss the goals and common content covered by successful women's groups, share best practices on forming and sustaining women's groups, and describe common pitfalls to avoid. When forming a women's group, identifying the group's vision, mission, and primary aim statements are important, and early meetings should deliberately establish a tone of inclusion. We acknowledge that the term "women's groups" implies that gender identity is binary - in reality, these groups are for all who want to combat gender inequities in health care. While early stages of women's groups typically focus on community-building, peer networking, and inviting guest speakers to speak about relevant topics, successful groups often ultimately pivot to advocacy, internal capacity-building, evaluation, and dissemination. To sustain and maintain the group, succession planning, regular opportunities for evaluation, and deliberate planning are essential. Although usual principles of successful small group creation apply, this article outlines unique considerations for how women's groups can advance gender equity.

Provider assessment of eligibility for hepatitis C treatment in HIV-infected homeless and marginally housed persons.

PURPOSE: To characterize the group of providers delivering medical care to HIV and hepatitis C (HCV) co-infected homeless and marginally housed individuals in San Francisco and to assess factors affecting provider decisions to initiate HCV treatment in this population. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The Research in Access to Care for the Homeless (REACH) cohort is a representative sample of HIV-infected homeless and marginally housed individuals identified from single room occupancy hotels, homeless shelters and free lunch programs in San Francisco. Primary care providers (PCP) for active, HIV/HCV co-infected REACH cohort participants were administered face-to-face, semi-structured interviews. REACH participants were administered quarterly face-to-face structured interviews. RESULTS: 52/62 (83.9%) providers were interviewed regarding 133/155 (85.8%) active, HIV/HCV co-infected patients. Providers classified 94/133 (70.7%) patients as ineligible for HCV treatment. The mean number of reasons for ineligibility was 3.2. Most frequent reasons for provider determination of ineligibility included likelihood of poor medication adherence, depression, active injection drug use and patient disinterest in treatment. In addition, structural barriers to treatment included poor access to testing, delays in evaluation by a gastroenterologist and exclusion from treatment of patients with comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: While HCV infection is common, HCV treatment is rare in the HIV/HCV coinfected urban poor. On average, the PCP in this study are experienced and are familiar with this patient population. There are many reasons for providers classifying patients as ineligible for HCV treatment. While these reasons indicate that treatment is difficult given chaotic lifestyle and concurrent medical conditions of this population, they are not insurmountable barriers. New treatments and strategies are necessary to treat this population with high rates of hepatitis C infection.