Implicit bias instruction across disciplines related to the social determinants of health: a scoping review.

One criticism of published curricula addressing implicit bias is that few achieve skill development in implicit bias recognition and management (IBRM). To inform the development of skills-based curricula addressing IBRM, we conducted a scoping review of the literature inquiring, "What interventions exist focused on IBRM in professions related to social determinants of health: education, law, social work, and the health professions inclusive of nursing, allied health professions, and medicine?"Authors searched eight databases for articles published from 2000 to 2020. Included studies: (1) described interventions related to implicit bias; and (2) addressed knowledge, attitude and/or skills as outcomes. Excluded were interventions solely focused on reducing/neutralizing implicit bias. Article review for inclusion and data charting occurred independently and in duplicate. Investigators compared characteristics across studies; data charting focused on educational and assessment strategies. Fifty-one full-text articles for data charting and synthesis, with more than 6568 learners, were selected. Educational strategies included provocative/engagement triggers, the Implicit Association Test, reflection and discussion, and various active learning strategies. Most assessments were self-report, with fewer objective measures. Eighteen funded studies utilized federal, foundation, institutional, and private sources. This review adds to the literature by providing tangible examples of curricula to complement existing frameworks, and identifying opportunities for further research in innovative skills-based instruction, learner assessment, and development and validation of outcome metrics. Continued research addressing IBRM would enable learners to develop and practice skills to recognize and manage their implicit biases during clinical encounters, thereby advancing the goal of improved, equitable patient outcomes.

Strategies for Advancing Equity in Frontline Clinical Assessment.

Educational equity in medicine cannot be achieved without addressing assessment bias. Assessment bias in health professions education is prevalent and has extensive implications for learners and, ultimately, the health care system. Medical schools and educators desire to minimize assessment bias, but there is no current consensus on effective approaches. Frontline teaching faculty have the opportunity to mitigate bias in clinical assessment in real time. Based on their experiences as educators, the authors created a case study about a student to illustrate ways bias affects learner assessment. In this paper, the authors use their case study to provide faculty with evidence-based approaches to mitigate bias and promote equity in clinical assessment. They focus on 3 components of equity in assessment: contextual equity, intrinsic equity, and instrumental equity. To address contextual equity, or the environment in which learners are assessed, the authors recommend building a learning environment that promotes equity and psychological safety, understanding the learners' contexts, and undertaking implicit bias training. Intrinsic equity, centered on the tools and practices used during assessment, can be promoted by using competency-based, structured assessment methods and employing frequent, direct observation to assess multiple domains. Instrumental equity, focused on communication and how assessments are used, includes specific, actionable feedback to support growth and use of competency-based narrative descriptors in assessments. Using these strategies, frontline clinical faculty members can actively promote equity in assessment and support the growth of a diverse health care workforce.

A Framework for Inclusive Graduate Medical Education Recruitment Strategies: Meeting the ACGME Standard for a Diverse and Inclusive Workforce.

To help address health care disparities and promote higher-quality, culturally sensitive care in the United States, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and other governing bodies propose cultivating a more diverse physician workforce. In addition, improved training and patient outcomes have been demonstrated for diverse care teams. However, prioritizing graduate medical education (GME) diversity and inclusion efforts can be challenging and unidimensional diversity initiatives typically result in failure.Little literature exists regarding actionable steps to promote diversity in GME. Building on existing literature and the authors' experiences at different institutions, the authors propose a 5-point inclusive recruitment framework for diversifying GME training programs. This article details each of the 5 steps of the framework, which begins with strong institutional support by setting diversity as a priority. Forming a cycle, the other 4 steps are seeking out candidates, implementing inclusive recruitment practices, investing in trainee success, and building the pipeline. Practical strategies for each step and recommendations for measurable outcomes for continued support for this work are provided. The proposed framework may better equip colleagues and leaders in academic medicine to prioritize and effectively promote diversity and inclusion in GME at their respective institutions.

The Crossroads of Health Policy and Academic Medicine: An Early Introduction to Health Policy Skills to Facilitate Change.

Introduction: Despite significant health care reform in the past 10 years, health disparities persist in marginalized and low-resource communities. Although there are a lot of reasons for health disparities, many of which are not related to health care, changes in health policy can lead to improved health equity. Redefining health policy as an important aspect of medical education could popularize the teaching and application of health policy competencies within academic health centers. Methods: The Kern model was applied to develop a workshop to educate medical students on basic health policy concepts and opportunities for them to apply a health policy framework to facilitate organizational change. Specifically, the workshop helped trainees to define common concepts in health policy, to understand a framework for developing policy initiatives, and to identify areas of overlap between health policy and academic medicine. Instructional methods included a PowerPoint presentation, vignette-based small-group discussion, and career reflection. Results: The workshop was implemented at three national conferences with a total of 144 participants. Comparing pre- and postworkshop survey responses, participants felt health policy work was compatible with an academic medicine career. Over 95% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that each objective had been met. Discussion: By viewing health policy through the lens of academia, trainees were able to develop a new appreciation for how health policy activities can contribute to peer-reviewed publications, teaching, and leadership opportunities. Participants were better situated to integrate health policy skills in their academic or nonacademic careers.