Allies Welcomed to Advance Racial Equity (AWARE) Faculty Seminar Series: Program Design and Implementation.

INTRODUCTION: In the wake of George Floyd's murder, White faculty in our department began to express the desire to gain a greater understanding of structural racism and racial inequity. To facilitate this learning, support allyship, and mitigate the emotional labor and taxation that frequently falls on faculty of color to respond to these appeals, we developed AWARE (Allies Welcomed to Advance Racial Equity), a faculty seminar series primarily designed for and led by a majority White faculty to tackle the topics of structural racism, Whiteness, and Anti-racist action. METHODS: We developed a 6-session seminar series, identifying 5 White faculty as lecturers and a cadre of Black and White volunteer facilitators, to lead 60-minute sessions comprised of lecture, facilitated small group reflection, and large group sharing, that reviewed key topics/texts on structural racism, Whiteness, and Anti-racism. RESULTS: Attendance ranged from 26 to 37 participants at each session. About 80% of faculty participated in at least 1 session of the program. The majority of participants (85%) felt "more empowered to influence their current environment to be more inclusive of others" and were "better equipped to advocate for themselves or others." Most (81%) felt "more connected to their colleagues following completion of the program." Ultimately, faculty thought highly of the program upon completion with 26/27 (96%) stating they would recommend the program to a colleague. DISCUSSION: We offer a reproducible model to improve departmental climate by engaging in the shared labor of educating our colleagues and communities about structural racism, Whiteness, and Anti-racism to create a point of entry into reflection, dialogue, and deliberate actions for change.

Obstetrics risk Assessment: Evaluation of selection criteria for vaccine research studies in pregnant women.

Vaccines designed for use in pregnancy and vaccine trials specifically involving pregnant women are rapidly expanding. One of the key challenges in designing maternal immunization trials is that developing exclusion criteria requires understanding and quantifying the background risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes in the pregnancy being studied, which can occur independent of any intervention and be unrelated to vaccine administration. The Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in Pregnancy (GAIA) project has developed and published case definitions and guidelines for data collection, analysis, and evaluation of maternal immunization safety in trials involving pregnant women. Complementing this work, we sought to understand how to best assess obstetric risk of adverse outcomes and differentiate it from the assessment of vaccine safety. Quantification of obstetric risk is based on prior and current obstetric, and maternal medical history. We developed a step-wise approach to evaluate and quantify obstetric and maternal risk factors in pregnancy based on review of published literature and guidelines, and critically assessed these factors in the context of designing inclusion and exclusion criteria for maternal vaccine studies. We anticipate this risk assessment evaluation may assist clinical trialists with study design decisions, including selection of exclusion criteria for vaccine trials involving pregnant women, consideration of sub-group classification, such as high or low risk subjects, or schedule considerations, such as preferred trimester of gestation for an intervention during pregnancy. Additionally, this tool may be utilized in data stratification at time of study analyses.

Collaborative Care for Perinatal Depression Among Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Women: Adverse Neonatal Birth Events and Treatment Response.

OBJECTIVE: The study examined the effectiveness of a perinatal collaborative care intervention in moderating the effects of adverse neonatal birth events on risks of postpartum depressive symptoms and impaired functioning among women of lower socioeconomic status with antenatal depression. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessments was conducted in ten public health centers, comparing MOMCare (choice of brief interpersonal psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, or both) with intensive maternity support services (MSS-Plus). Participants had probable diagnoses of major depressive disorder or dysthymia during pregnancy. Generalized estimating equations estimated differences in depression and functioning measures between groups with and without adverse birth events within the treatment arms. A total of 160 women, 43% of whom experienced at least one adverse birth event, were included in the analyses. RESULTS: For women who received MOMCare, postpartum depression scores (measured with the Symptom Checklist-20) did not differ by whether or not they experienced an adverse birth event (mean±SD scores of .86±.51 for mothers with an adverse birth event and .83±.56 for mothers with no event; p=.78). For women who received MSS-Plus, having an adverse birth event was associated with persisting depression in the postpartum period (mean scores of 1.20±.0.61 for mothers with an adverse birth event and .93±.52 for mothers without adverse birth event; p=.04). Similar results were seen for depression response rates and functioning. CONCLUSIONS: MOMCare mitigated the risk of postpartum depressive symptoms and impaired functioning among women of low socioeconomic status who had antenatal depression and who experienced adverse birth events.