Hidden Curriculum and the Demographic Stoicism That Keeps Women and Minorities Away From Radiology: A Mixed-Methods Study of Medical Students.

OBJECTIVE: To understand how women and historically underrepresented minority medical students perceive radiology as a potential career choice. METHODS: Medical students representing a broad spectrum of radiology exposure from a single institution were invited to participate in a mixed-methods study. Participants completed a 16-item survey about demographics and perceptions of radiology. Ten focus groups were administered to probe decision making regarding career selection. The themes influencing women and historically underrepresented minority students are presented. RESULTS: Forty-nine medical students, including 29 (59%) women and 17 (35%) underrepresented minorities, participated. Most participants (28 of 48, 58%) reported men outnumbered women in radiology. Female participants reported a lack of mentorship and role models as major concerns. Outreach efforts focused on the family-friendly nature of radiology were viewed as patronizing. Demographic improvements in the field were viewed as very slow. Forty-six percent (22 of 48) of participants indicated that radiology had a less underrepresented racial or ethnic workforce than other medical specialties. Minority participants especially noted a lack of radiology presence in mainstream media, so students have few preconceived biases. A failure to organically connect with the mostly White male radiologists because of a lack of shared background was a major barrier. Finally, participants described a hidden curriculum that pushes minority medical students away from specialty fields like radiology and toward primary care fields to address underserved communities and health care disparities. DISCUSSION: Women and historically underrepresented minority medical students perceive major barriers to choosing a career in radiology. Radiology departments must develop sophisticated multilevel approaches to improve diversity.

Academic Radiology in the United States: Defining Gender Disparities in Faculty Leadership and Academic Rank.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Female physicians in academic medicine have faced barriers that potentially affect representation in different fields and delay promotion. Little is known about gender representation differences in United States academic radiology departments, particularly within the most pursued subspecialties. PURPOSE: To determine whether gender differences exist in United States academic radiology departments across seven subspecialties with respect to academic ranks, departmental leadership positions, experience, and scholarly metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study from November 2018 to June 2020, a database of United States academic radiologists at 129 academic departments in seven subspecialties was created. Each radiologist's academic rank, departmental leadership position (executive-level - Chair, Director, Chief, and Department or Division Head vs vice-level - vice, assistant, or associate positions of executive level), self-identified gender, years in practice, and measures of scholarly productivity (number of publications, citations, and h-index) were compiled from institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, Scopus, and official NPI profiles. The primary outcome, gender composition differences in these cohorts, was analyzed using Chi2 while continuous data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. The adjusted gender difference for all factors was determined using a multivariate logistic regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 5086 academic radiologists (34.7% women) with a median 14 years of practice (YOP) were identified and indexed. There were 919 full professors (26.1% women, p < 0.01) and 1055 executive-level leadership faculty (30.6% women, p < 0.01). Within all subspecialties except breast imaging, women were in the minority (35.4% abdominal, 79.1% breast, 12.1% interventional, 27.5% musculoskeletal, 22.8% neuroradiology, 45.1% pediatric, and 19.5% nuclear; p < 0.01). Relative to subspecialty gender composition, women full professors were underrepresented in abdominal, pediatric, and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05) and women in any executive-level leadership were underrepresented in abdominal and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05). However, after adjusting for h-index and YOP, gender did not influence rates of professorship or executive leadership. The strongest single predictors for professorship or executive leadership were h-index and YOP. CONCLUSION: Women academic radiologists in the United States are underrepresented among senior faculty members despite having similar levels of experience as men. Gender disparities regarding the expected number of women senior faculty members relative to individual subspecialty gender composition were more pronounced in abdominal and nuclear radiology, and less pronounced in breast and neuroradiology. Overall, h-index and YOP were the strongest predictors for full-professorship and executive leadership among faculty. KEY RESULTS: ● Though women comprise 34.7% of all academic radiologists, women are underrepresented among senior faculty members (26.1% of full professors and 30.6% of executive leadership) ● Women in junior faculty positions had higher median years of practice than their male counterparts (10 vs 8 for assistant professors, 21 vs 13 for vice leadership) ● Years of practice and h-index were the strongest predictors for full professorship and executive leadership.

Feasibility of an Assessment Tool as a Data-Driven Approach to Reducing Racial Bias in Biomedical Publications.

The editorial independence of biomedical journals allows flexibility to meet a wide range of research interests. However, it also is a barrier for coordination between journals to solve challenging issues such as racial bias in the scientific literature. A standardized tool to screen for racial bias could prevent the publication of racially biased papers. Biomedical journals would maintain editorial autonomy while still allowing comparable data to be collected and analyzed across journals. A racially diverse research team carried out a three-phase study to generate and test a racial bias assessment tool for biomedical research. Phase 1, an in-depth, structured literature search to identify recommendations, found near complete agreement in the literature on addressing race in biomedical research. Phase 2, construction of a framework from those recommendations, provides the major innovation of this paper. The framework includes three dimensions of race: 1) context, 2) tone and terminology, and 3) analysis, which are the basis for the Race Equity Vetting Instrument for Editorial Workflow (REVIEW) tool. Phase 3, pilot testing the assessment tool, showed that the REVIEW tool was effective at flagging multiple concerns in widely criticized articles. This study demonstrates the feasibility of the proposed REVIEW tool to reduce racial bias in research. Next steps include testing this tool on a broader sample of biomedical research to determine how the tool performs on more subtle examples of racial bias.

Longitudinal changes of financial hardship in patients with multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the longitudinal changes in three domains of financial hardship (i.e., financial worry, cost-related care non-adherence, material hardship) in patients with MS. METHODS: A convenience sample of 559 adult patients with a known diagnosis of MS visiting a single outpatient neurology clinic between July 2018 to February 2020 were approached. Patients completed surveys at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-enrollment. Outcomes included financial worry (using Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity Patient-Reported Outcome (COST)), cumulative cost-related care non-adherence, and cumulative financial hardship as adopted by Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Associations of financial worry with care non-adherence and material hardship were assessed using ANOVA. RESULTS: A total of 242 (43.3%) participated at baseline. Mean age was 43.6 ± 13.6 years (76.9% female; 46.4% White); median months from diagnosis was 63 (IQR, 28-120). The mean COST score at enrollment was 17.43 (± 10.15) and increased to 19.41 (± 11.12) at 12 months (p = 0.09). Cumulative cost-related MS care non-adherence increased from 32.6% at baseline to 53.3% at 12 months (20.7% increase; p <0.001). Cumulative material hardship increased from 61.6% at baseline to 76.0% at 12 months (14.4% increase; p<0.001). Changes in COST score from baseline to 12 months were significantly associated with changes in non-adherence and material hardship (p<0.01). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Cost-related care non-adherence and material hardship accumulate progressively over time and correlates with financial worry. Clinical practices should focus on screening those at risk and intervene with the goal of mitigating costs of care and improving patient outcomes.

Teaching Physician Supervision: Medicare's Ongoing Imperative for Academic Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE. Medicare permits radiologists to bill for trainee work but only in narrowly defined circumstances and with considerable consequences for noncompliance. The purpose of this article is to introduce relevant policy rationale and definitions, review payment requirements, outline documentation and operational considerations for diagnostic and interventional radiology services, and offer practical suggestions for academic radiologists striving to optimize regulatory compliance. CONCLUSION. As academic radiology departments advance their missions of service, teaching, and scholarship, most rely on residents and fellows to support expanding clinical demands. Given the risks of technical noncompliance, institutional commitment and ongoing education regarding teaching supervision compliance are warranted.

Perceptions and experiences of multiple sclerosis patients regarding out-of-pocket costs of care discussions.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a costly disease and out-of-pocket (OOP) cost information is difficult to obtain. We seek to characterize the perceptions and experiences of MS patients regarding out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of care discussions and evaluate factors associated with them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MS patients visiting an outpatient neurology clinic 7/2018-2/2019 were approached to complete a survey regarding costs of care discussions. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with patient preferences in discussing OOP costs with their provider and actions to contact insurance company to inquire about OOP costs. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients responded (response rate 43.5%). With regard to perceptions, 85.3% of patients expressed interest in knowing about OOP costs, 59.6% reported desire specifically for their healthcare provider to discuss OOP costs, and 18.5% reported that there have been times they wanted to discuss OOP costs but did not have the opportunity to do so. With regard to experiences, 20.5% reported discussing costs with their providers in the past three months, 15.5% contacted their insurance company regarding OOP costs, and 10.6% received a call from an imaging center to inform them of OOP costs. Patients who were male, white, or had at least one relapse were significantly more likely to desire to discuss OOP costs with their provider. No factors were significantly associated with patients contacting their insurance company regarding OOP costs. CONCLUSION: Most MS patients would like to discuss costs of care with their providers, but only one in five actually do so. Medical practices can take initiatives towards providing transparency in OOP costs.

Supporting Radiology Residents' Professional Development Through a Competitive Intramural Grant.

Research and other scholarly activities are an important and required component of diagnostic radiology training. Several strategies, both at the departmental and the larger organizational levels, have been implemented to encourage radiology trainees to participate in these activities. In this article, we review and discuss our institution's 10-year experience in supporting the development and realization of scholarly projects through a competitive intramural grant for residents.

A Road Map to Foster Wellness and Engagement in Our Workplace-A Report of the 2018 Summer Intersociety Meeting.

The 2018 radiology Intersociety Committee reviewed the current state of stress and burnout in our workplaces and identified approaches for fostering engagement, wellness, and job satisfaction. In addition to emphasizing the importance of personal wellness (the fourth aim of health care), the major focus of the meeting was to identify strategies and themes to mitigate the frequency, manifestations, and impact of stress. Strategies include reducing the stigma of burnout, minimizing isolation through community building and fostering connectivity, utilizing data and benchmarking to guide effectiveness of improvement efforts, resourcing and training "wellness" committees, acknowledging value contributions of team members, and improving efficiency in the workplace. Four themes were identified to prioritize organizational efforts: (1) collecting, analyzing, and benchmarking data; (2) developing effective leadership; (3) building high-functioning teams; and (4) amplifying our voice to increase our influence.

Health Care Price Transparency and Communication: Implications for Radiologists and Patients in an Era of Expanding Shared Decision Making.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the literature on communicating transparency in health care pricing, both overall and specifically for medical imaging. Focus is also placed on the imperatives and initiatives that will increasingly impact radiologists and their patients. CONCLUSION: Most Americans seek transparency in health care pricing, yet such discussions occur in fewer than half of patient encounters. Although price transparency tools can help decrease health care spending, most are used infrequently and most lack information about quality. Given the high costs associated with many imaging services, radiologists should be aware of such initiatives to optimize patient engagement and informed shared decision making.