"It's Time to Do It, to Make It a Major Part of Medicine": Faculty Experience With a Shift Toward an Antioppressive Medical School Curriculum.

PURPOSE: Health inequities compel medical educators to transform curricula to prepare physicians to improve the health of diverse populations. This mandate requires curricular focus on antioppression, which is a change for faculty who learned and taught under a different paradigm. This study used the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) to explore faculty perceptions of and experiences with a shift to a curriculum that prioritizes antioppressive content and process. METHOD: In this qualitative study, authors interviewed faculty course directors and teachers at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine from March 2021 to January 2022. Questions addressed faculty experience and understanding regarding the curriculum shift toward antioppression, perceptions of facilitators and barriers to change, and their interactions with colleagues and learners about this change. Using the CBAM components as sensitizing concepts, the authors conducted thematic analysis. RESULTS: Sixteen faculty participated. Their perceptions of their experience with the first year of an antioppression curriculum initiative were characterized by 3 broad themes: (1) impetus for change, (2) personal experience with antioppressive curricular topics, and (3) strategies necessary to accomplish the change. Faculty described 3 driving forces for the shift toward antioppressive curricula: moral imperative, response to national and local events, and evolving culture of medicine. Despite broad alignment with the change, faculty expressed uncertainties on 3 subthemes: uncertainty about what is an antioppressive curriculum, the scientific perspective, and fear. Faculty also reflected on primary facilitators and barriers to accomplishing the change. CONCLUSIONS: The shift to an antioppressive curriculum compels faculty to increase their knowledge and skills and adopt a critical, self-reflective lens on the interplay of medicine and oppression. This study's findings can inform faculty development efforts and highlight curricular leadership and resources needed to support faculty through this type of curricular change.

Workplace Harassment, Cyber Incivility, and Climate in Academic Medicine.

Importance: The culture of academic medicine may foster mistreatment that disproportionately affects individuals who have been marginalized within a given society (minoritized groups) and compromises workforce vitality. Existing research has been limited by a lack of comprehensive, validated measures, low response rates, and narrow samples as well as comparisons limited to the binary gender categories of male or female assigned at birth (cisgender). Objective: To evaluate academic medical culture, faculty mental health, and their relationship. Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 830 faculty members in the US received National Institutes of Health career development awards from 2006-2009, remained in academia, and responded to a 2021 survey that had a response rate of 64%. Experiences were compared by gender, race and ethnicity (using the categories of Asian, underrepresented in medicine [defined as race and ethnicity other than Asian or non-Hispanic White], and White), and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ+) status. Multivariable models were used to explore associations between experiences of culture (climate, sexual harassment, and cyber incivility) with mental health. Exposures: Minoritized identity based on gender, race and ethnicity, and LGBTQ+ status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Three aspects of culture were measured as the primary outcomes: organizational climate, sexual harassment, and cyber incivility using previously developed instruments. The 5-item Mental Health Inventory (scored from 0 to 100 points with higher values indicating better mental health) was used to evaluate the secondary outcome of mental health. Results: Of the 830 faculty members, there were 422 men, 385 women, 2 in nonbinary gender category, and 21 who did not identify gender; there were 169 Asian respondents, 66 respondents underrepresented in medicine, 572 White respondents, and 23 respondents who did not report their race and ethnicity; and there were 774 respondents who identified as cisgender and heterosexual, 31 as having LGBTQ+ status, and 25 who did not identify status. Women rated general climate (5-point scale) more negatively than men (mean, 3.68 [95% CI, 3.59-3.77] vs 3.96 [95% CI, 3.88-4.04], respectively, P < .001). Diversity climate ratings differed significantly by gender (mean, 3.72 [95% CI, 3.64-3.80] for women vs 4.16 [95% CI, 4.09-4.23] for men, P < .001) and by race and ethnicity (mean, 4.0 [95% CI, 3.88-4.12] for Asian respondents, 3.71 [95% CI, 3.50-3.92] for respondents underrepresented in medicine, and 3.96 [95% CI, 3.90-4.02] for White respondents, P = .04). Women were more likely than men to report experiencing gender harassment (sexist remarks and crude behaviors) (71.9% [95% CI, 67.1%-76.4%] vs 44.9% [95% CI, 40.1%-49.8%], respectively, P < .001). Respondents with LGBTQ+ status were more likely to report experiencing sexual harassment than cisgender and heterosexual respondents when using social media professionally (13.3% [95% CI, 1.7%-40.5%] vs 2.5% [95% CI, 1.2%-4.6%], respectively, P = .01). Each of the 3 aspects of culture and gender were significantly associated with the secondary outcome of mental health in the multivariable analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: High rates of sexual harassment, cyber incivility, and negative organizational climate exist in academic medicine, disproportionately affecting minoritized groups and affecting mental health. Ongoing efforts to transform culture are necessary.

An Assessment of Faculty Perceptions of Wellness Needs and Strategies to Optimize Engagement With Wellness Resources in Academic Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Faculty at academic medical institutions are at increased risk for burnout. This study aimed to assess faculty perceptions of wellness needs and identify strategies to optimize engagement with individualized wellness resources. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 37 faculty members in one US academic medical center. RESULTS: Participants identified significant barriers to achieving emotional health and wellness goals. Areas where participants identified needing the most support included interpersonal relationships, accountability for wellness goals, career support, financial resources, and mentorship. Most participants were unaware of all wellness resources available at their institution. Participants recommended regular marketing and emphasizing confidentiality of employer-sponsored programs. They also provided feedback on specific dissemination and marketing methods. CONCLUSIONS: This research underscores the need for wellness resources for faculty and the importance of intentional dissemination of these resources to optimize uptake.

The Relationship of Mentorship to Career Outcomes in Academic Psychiatry and Psychology: a Needs Assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Faculty development is designed to facilitate career advancement of junior faculty but there is limited empirical evidence on how to design an effective program. METHODS: As a first step in the design of an effective program, a needs assessment was conducted. Participants were faculty members of an academic psychiatry department. Participants completed a quantitative and qualitative survey assessing their experience with mentors, academic self-efficacy, career burnout and satisfaction, academic productivity, and perceived barriers to scholarship. RESULTS: Eighty percent (N = 104) of eligible faculty members completed the study survey (54% female; 81% White, 10% underrepresented in medicine). Less than half of the respondents (44%) reported having a current mentor. Number of mentors (r = .33; p < .01), mentorship meetings (r = .35; p < .01), and mentorship quality (r = .33; p < .01) were significantly correlated to a standardized measure of academic self-efficacy. Self-efficacy was significantly associated with academic productivity (r = .44; p < .001) and career satisfaction (r = .29; p < .05). The top barriers to scholarship productivity were time and lack of access to resources. Faculty members without a mentor endorsed more barriers to scholarship (p < .001) than those with a mentor. Themes that emerged from the qualitative data suggest that mentorship supports career advancement through coaching and professional development, invitations to collaborate and resource share, networking, and active teaching. CONCLUSION: Based on the relationship of mentoring to career outcomes, a robust faculty development program needs a formal academic mentorship program to improve career satisfaction and academic productivity.

Employee Health and Wellness Outcomes Associated With Perceived Discrimination in Academic Medicine: A Qualitative Analysis.

Importance: Organizational culture and workplace interactions may enhance or adversely impact the wellness of all members of learning and work environments, yet a nuanced understanding of how such experiences within health care organizations impact the health and wellness of their membership is lacking. Objective: To identify and characterize the reported health and wellness outcomes associated with perceived discrimination among academic medicine faculty, staff, and students. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study analyzed anonymously submitted written narratives from 2016 that described experiences related to inclusion in the workplace or lack thereof. Narratives that described health outcomes associated with work- or school-based discrimination were purposively sampled. Participants were faculty, staff, and students at health-related schools or hospitals affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania. Data analysis was performed from March 2019 to January 2020. Exposures: Self-reported experiences, both witnessed and personal, of discrimination in the workplace. Results: A total of 315 narratives were collected, and 115 narratives from 115 participants were analyzed. Most respondents identified as female (70 respondents [60.9%]), non-Hispanic White (68 respondents [59.1%]), and heterosexual (89 respondents [77.4%]) and had worked at the institution for at least 1 year (99 respondents [86.0%]). The outcomes associated with adverse workplace experiences were broad and ranged in nature from emotional to mental and physical. Most reported outcomes were emotional (101 respondents [87.8%]), and more than 1 in 10 narratives (14 respondents [12.2%]) described a mental or physical health outcome. Many of the participants felt devaluated, overexerted, and hopeless, resulting in clinically relevant manifestations, such as increased stress and anxiety levels and even elevated blood pressure. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study identified a continuum of negative outcomes on employee health and well-being associated with perceived discrimination and chronic exclusion in the workplace. These findings suggest the need for organizations to promote inclusion as a component of workplace wellness interventions.

This is Our Lane: A Pilot Study Examining the Surgeon's Role in Social Justice Advocacy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of social justice advocacy, surgeon attitudes toward individual involvement vary. We hypothesized that the majority of surgeons in this study, regardless of gender or training level, believe that surgeons should be involved in social justice movements. METHODS: A survey was distributed to surgical faculty and trainees at three academic tertiary care centers. Participation was anonymous with 123 respondents. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis with significance accepted when p < 0.05. Thematic analysis was performed on free responses. RESULTS: The response rate was 46%. Compared to men, women were more likely to state that surgeons should be involved (86% vs 64%, p = 0.01) and were personally involved in social justice advocacy (86% vs 51%, p = 0.0002). Social justice issues reported as most important to surgeons differed significantly by gender (p = 0.008). Generated themes for why certain types of advocacy involvement were inappropriate were personal choices, professionalism and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Social justice advocacy is important to most surgeons in this study, especially women. This emphasizes the need to incorporate advocacy into surgical practice.

Improved Perceptions of Education and Wellness Among General Surgery Residents and Faculty After the Implementation of Outpatient Scribes.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have revealed a high rate of burnout among general surgery (GS) residents. Efforts to design and implement interventions to mitigate fatigue in surgical trainees are critical. Our aim was to assess the educational and wellness impact of outpatient scribe utilization at an academic GS residency program. METHODS: Electronic surveys were sent to 38 GS residents and 15 faculties who used outpatient scribes for at least 12 months. Questions were scored on a 5-point Likert scale with answers of "Strongly agree" or "Agree" representing affirmative responses. RESULTS: Thirty residents and 14 faculty completed the survey, resulting in an 83% overall response rate. Twenty-eight (93%) residents and 12 (86%) faculty believed that scribes decrease the daily workload of trainees. Twenty-seven (90%) residents felt that scribes allow them more time to focus on patient care and improve the quality of their surgical education. Ninety-three percent of residents (n = 28) and faculty (n = 13) believed that scribes enhance resident well-being. Twenty-four (80%) residents reported that scribes help improve adherence to duty hour restrictions. Twenty-five (83%) residents believed that utilizing scribes is an effective fatigue mitigation strategy for surgical training programs. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that the implementation of an outpatient scribe program at an academic GS residency program may enhance resident education and wellness.

Medical Students' Demographic Characteristics and Their Perceptions of Faculty Role Modeling of Respect for Diversity.

Importance: Faculty role modeling is critical to medical students' professional development to provide culturally adept, patient-centered care. However, little is known about students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity. Objective: To examine whether variation exists in medical students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity by student demographic characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' 2016 and 2017 Medical School Graduation Questionnaire, which was administered to graduating students at 140 accredited allopathic US medical schools. Data were analyzed from January 1 to November 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity by the independent variables sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and age. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the extent to which student-reported perceptions of faculty respect for diversity varied by demographic characteristics, and logistic regression models were sequentially adjusted first for demographic characteristics and then for marital status and financial variables. Results: Of 30 651 students who completed the survey, the final study sample consisted of 28 778 respondents, representing 75.4% of the 38 160 total US medical school graduates in 2016 and 2017. Of the respondents, 14 804 (51.4%) were male participants and 1506 (5.2%) identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB); a total of 11 926 respondents (41.4%) were 26 years or younger. A total of 17 159 respondents (59.6%) identified as White, 5958 (20.7%) as Asian, 1469 (5.1%) as Black/African American, 2431 (8.4%) as Hispanic/Latinx, and 87 (0.3%) as American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander individuals. Overall, 5101 students (17.7%) reported perceiving that faculty showed a lack of respect for diversity. Of those who identified as Black/African American students, 540 (36.8%) reported perceiving a lack of faculty respect for diversity compared with 2468 White students (14.4%), with an OR of perceived lack of respect of 3.24 (95% CI, 2.86-3.66) after adjusting for other demographic characteristics and covariates. American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.03-2.92), Asian (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.49-1.75), or Hispanic/Latinx (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26-1.75) students also had greater odds of perceiving a lack of faculty respect for diversity compared with White students. Female students had greater odds compared with male students (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.25), and students who identified as LGB (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.74-2.22) or unknown sexual orientation (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.29-2.47) had greater odds compared with heterosexual students. Students aged 33 years or older had greater odds of reporting a perceived lack of respect compared with students aged 26 years or younger (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.58-2.08). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, female students, students belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups, and LGB students disproportionately reported perceiving a lack of respect for diversity among faculty, which has important implications for patient care, the learning environment, and the well-being of medical trainees.

Career Development Considerations for Academic Physician Mentees and Mentors in the Time of COVID-19: Jump in or Just Dip a Toe?

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted medical research, pushing mentors and mentees to decide if COVID-19 research would be germane to the early career investigator's developing research portfolio. With COVID-19 halting hundreds of federal trials involving non-COVID-19 research, mentors and mentees must also consider the broader moral calling of contributing to COVID-19 research. At the time of writing, the National Institutes of Health had responded to the pandemic with significant funding for COVID-19 research. However, because this pandemic is a new phenomenon, few mentors have expertise in the disease and relevant established resources. As a result, many mentors are unable to provide insight on COVID-19 research to early career investigators considering a pivot toward research related to this disease. The authors suggest 4 ways for mentees and mentors to respond to the changes the pandemic has brought to research funding and opportunities: (1) include COVID-19 research in existing portfolios to diversify intellectual opportunities and reduce funding risks; (2) negotiate the mentor-mentee relationship and roles and expectations early in project discussions-considering, as relevant, the disproportionate burden of home responsibilities often borne by early career faculty members who are women and/or from a minority group; (3) address any mentor limitations in content expertise; and (4) if the decision is to pivot to COVID-19 research, select projects with implications generalizable beyond this pandemic to other infectious outbreaks or to the redesign of health care delivery. Mentors and mentees must weigh the relevance of COVID-19 research projects to the postpandemic world and the amount of available funding against the developing interests of early career investigators. Academic medical centers nationwide must enable seasoned and early career researchers to contribute meaningfully to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 research.

Conflict of interest policies at Belgian medical faculties: Cross-sectional study indicates little oversight.

BACKGROUND: Medical students encounter pharmaceutical promotion from the very start of their training. Medical schools have an important role to play in educating medical students regarding the interactions between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and industry and in protecting them from commercial influence and conflict of interest (COI). In 2019, medical student associations in Belgium and abroad called for more preparation in dealing with COI and for a more independent medical training. As little information is available on the situation in our country, we undertook an assessment of conflict of interest policies at Belgium's medical schools. We relied on a methodology already used in studies from USA, Canada, Australia, France and Germany and adapted it to the Belgian context. METHODS: We identified 10 medical schools in Belgium. We searched the website of each medical school in November 2019 with standardized keywords for COI policies and learning activities on COI in the curriculum. The deans of medicine were invited to participate by sending us information that we could have overlooked during our web-based searches. We also consulted personal contacts within faculties among students and teachers. Based on a list of 15 criteria adapted from North American and French studies, we calculated a total for each faculty of medicine with a maximum score of 30 points. RESULTS: By December 2019, we had gathered a set of written documents for four faculties of medicine (40%) containing policies with varying degrees of precision and relevance to our survey. We found elements of the curriculum addressing the COI issue for one faculty (10%). In all cases, these policies consisted of "moderate" initiatives with little or no "restrictive" elements. Only one faculty showed interest in our study by providing us with relevant information (10%). Half of the faculty notified us of their refusal to participate in the study (50%) and the other faculties either did not respond or did not provide us with any information (40%). The maximum score obtained was 3 out of 30 points with six faculties scoring 0 (60%). CONCLUSION: There is little transparency regarding interactions between medical students and pharmaceutical companies at Belgian medical faculties, which may create COI issues. Initiatives to protect students from pharmaceutical promotion and to train them to manage their future interaction with pharmaceutical companies have a limited scope and are isolated. This is inconsistent with international recommendations from Health Action International, World Health Organization or the American Medical Students' Association. The Belgian government has legislated in favor of more transparency in the relation between HCPs and pharmaceutical industry. Indeed, it made the disclosure of benefits granted by the industry compulsory and limited their value. Our results show that there is still some way to go to ensure an independent medical training for future Belgian physicians.

Driving lesson or driving test? : A metaphor to help faculty separate feedback from assessment.

Although there is consensus in the medical education world that feedback is an important and effective tool to support experiential workplace-based learning, learners tend to avoid the feedback associated with direct observation because they perceive it as a high-stakes evaluation with significant consequences for their future. The perceived dominance of the summative assessment paradigm throughout medical education reduces learners' willingness to seek feedback, and encourages supervisors to mix up feedback with provision of 'objective' grades or pass/fail marks. This eye-opener article argues that the provision and reception of effective feedback by clinical supervisors and their learners is dependent on both parties' awareness of the important distinction between feedback used in coaching towards growth and development (assessment for learning) and reaching a high-stakes judgement on the learner's competence and fitness for practice (assessment of learning). Using driving lessons and the driving test as a metaphor for feedback and assessment helps supervisors and learners to understand this crucial difference and to act upon it. It is the supervisor's responsibility to ensure that supervisor and learner achieve a clear mutual understanding of the purpose of each interaction (i.e. feedback or assessment). To allow supervisors to use the driving lesson-driving test metaphor for this purpose in their interactions with learners, it should be included in faculty development initiatives, along with a discussion of the key importance of separating feedback from assessment, to promote a feedback culture of growth and support programmatic assessment of competence.

Operative Self-Confidence, Hesitation, and Ability Assessment of Surgical Trainees in Rural Kenya.

BACKGROUND: The education of surgical trainees is ideally designed to produce surgeons with both confidence and competence. This involves the development of autonomy in the operating room. Factors associated with autonomy and entrustment have been studied in high-resource settings. In a resource-limited context, where autonomy is solely at the discretion of faculty, and there are fewer external constraints to restrict it, we hypothesized that assessment of a trainee's performance would be dependent upon reported confidence levels of both faculty and trainees in those trainees' abilities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At a teaching hospital in rural Kenya, operative experience surveys were administered to eleven general surgery trainees (PGY1-5) and six faculty paired dyads immediately following operative procedures in May 2016 to elicit self-reported assessments of confidence, hesitation, and ability as measured by the Zwisch Scale. We examined factors related to learning and used dyadic structural equation models to understand factors related to the assessment of ability. RESULTS: There were 107 paired surveys among 136 trainees and 130 faculty evaluations. Faculty scrubbed into 76 (72%) cases. In comparison to trainees, faculty were more likely to give a higher average score for confidence (4.08 versus 3.90; P value: 0.005), a lower score for hesitation (2.67 versus 2.84; P value: 0.001), and a lower score for the ability to perform the operation independently (2.73 versus 3.02; P value: 0.01). Faculty and trainee perceptions of hesitation influenced their ability scores. Trainee hesitation (OR 12.1; 1.2-127.6, P = 0.04) predicted whether trainees reported experiencing learning. CONCLUSIONS: Between trainees and faculty at a teaching program in rural Kenya, assessment scores of confidence, hesitation, and ability differ in value but remain fairly correlated. Hesitation is predictive of ability assessment, as well as self-reported learning opportunities. Focus upon identifying when trainees hesitate to proceed with a case may yield important educational opportunities.

Development and Validation of a Theory-Informed Group Learning Environment Assessment Tool for Graduate Medical Education Programs.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies showed that psychological safety is important to resident perception of the work environment, and improved psychological safety improves resident satisfaction survey scores. However, there is no evidence in medical education literature specifically addressing relationships between psychological safety and learning behaviors or its impact on learning outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We developed and gathered validity evidence for a group learning environment assessment tool using Edmondson's Teaming Theory and Webb's Depth of Knowledge model as a theoretical framework. METHODS: In 2018, investigators developed the preliminary tool. The authors administered the resulting survey to neonatology faculty and trainees at Baylor College of Medicine morning report sessions and collected validity evidence (content, response process, and internal structure) to describe the instrument's psychometric properties. RESULTS: Between December 2018 and July 2019, 450 surveys were administered, and 393 completed surveys were collected (87% response rate). Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis testing the 3-factor measurement model of the 15-item tool showed acceptable fit of the hypothesized model with standardized root mean square residual = 0.034, root mean square error approximation = 0.088, and comparative fit index = 0.987. Standardized path coefficients ranged from 0.66 to 0.97. Almost all absolute standardized residual correlations were less than 0.10. Cronbach's alpha scores showed internal consistency of the constructs. There was a high correlation among the constructs. CONCLUSIONS: Validity evidence suggests the developed group learning assessment tool is a reliable instrument to assess psychological safety, learning behaviors, and learning outcomes during group learning sessions such as morning report.

The road to academic surgical leadership: Characteristics and experiences of surgical chairpersons.

BACKGROUND: The evolving landscape of academic surgery demands leaders who are not only effective clinicians and researchers, but also administrators able to navigate complex hospital organizations, financial pressures in the era of quality measures, and inclusion of an increasingly diverse workforce. The aim of this study was to characterize achievements and assess perspectives in becoming a surgical chair in order to guide young surgeons in their career trajectories to surgical leadership. METHODS: A survey encompassing demographics, surgical training, nonmedical advanced degrees, academic advancement, and leadership experiences was sent via electronic mail to members of the American College of Surgeons Society of Surgical Chairs in December 2018. RESULTS: Of 191 Society of Surgical Chairs members, 52 (27.2%) completed the survey, with 6 (11.5%) women, 40 (76.9%) white, and the majority becoming chair between ages 46 and 60 (n = 39, 75.0%). Training beyond residency included fellowships (n = 41, 78.8%) and advanced nonmedical degrees (n = 15, 28.8%). Median H-index was 47 (range 10-120) with 126 (5-500) research publications, and grants received was 2 (0-38) for federal and 5 (0-43) for industry. Female chairs appear to have fewer nonmedical degrees (n = 1) and no difference in age at becoming chair (66.7% vs 79.6% between ages 46 and 60), H-index (26 [10-41] vs 49 [17-120]), or publications (93 [10-189] vs 150 [5,500]). Prior educational (n = 36, 69.2%) and clinical (n = 44, 84.6%) leadership roles were common, with 30 chairs (57.7%) having held both roles. Experiences which respondents felt have most helped them function as chair included serving as a clinical division director (n = 37, 71.2%), residency program director (n = 28, 53.8%), leadership courses (n = 28, 53.8%), a research career (n = 22, 42.3%), and being a vice/interim chair (n = 15, 28.8%). Personal traits felt to be most important in becoming a successful chair included being effective at communication (n = 37, 71.2%), collaborative (n = 35, 67.3%), trustworthy (n = 30, 57.7%), and a problem-solver (n = 27, 51.9%). CONCLUSION: Becoming a department surgical chair often involves not only surgical subspecialty expertise, but also nonmedical training and prior leadership roles, which help facilitate development of skills integral to navigating the collaborative and diverse nature of academic surgery in the current era.

Association of Gender With Learner Assessment in Graduate Medical Education.

Importance: Gender bias may affect assessment in competency-based medical education. Objective: To evaluate the association of gender with assessment of internal medicine residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite, retrospective, cross-sectional study included 6 internal medicine residency programs in the United States. Data were collected from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, and analyzed from June 7 to November 6, 2019. Exposures: Faculty assessments of resident performance during general medicine inpatient rotations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Standardized scores were calculated based on rating distributions for the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's core competencies and internal medicine Milestones at each site. Standardized scores are expressed as SDs from the mean. The interaction of gender and postgraduate year (PGY) with standardized scores was assessed, adjusting for site, time of year, resident In-Training Examination percentile rank, and faculty rank and specialty. Results: Data included 3600 evaluations for 703 residents (387 male [55.0%]) by 605 faculty (318 male [52.6%]). Interaction between resident gender and PGY was significant in 6 core competencies. In PGY2, female residents scored significantly higher than male residents in 4 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.10 [0.04] vs 0.22 [0.05]; P = .04), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], -0.06 [0.05] vs 0.13 [0.05]; P = .003), professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], -0.04 [0.06] vs 0.21 [0.06]; P = .001), and interpersonal and communication skills (mean standardized score [SE], 0.06 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.06]; P < .001). In PGY3, male residents scored significantly higher than female patients in 5 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.05]; P = .03), medical knowledge (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.24 [0.06]; P = .003), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], 0.30 [0.05] vs 0.12 [0.06]; P = .02), practice-based learning (mean standardized score [SE], 0.39 [0.05] vs 0.16 [0.06]; P = .004), and professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], 0.35 [0.05] vs 0.18 [0.06]; P = .03). There was a significant increase in male residents' competency scores between PGY2 and PGY3 (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, 0.208-0.391; P ≤ .002) that was not seen in female residents' scores (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, -0.117 to 0.101; P ≥ .14). There was a significant increase in male residents' scores between PGY2 and PGY3 cohorts in 6 competencies with female faculty and in 4 competencies with male faculty. There was no significant change in female residents' competency scores between PGY2 to PGY3 cohorts with male or female faculty. Interaction between faculty-resident gender dyad and PGY was significant in the patient care competency (ß estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY1 vs PGY3, 0.184 [0.158]; ß estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY2 vs PGY3, 0.457 [0.181]; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, resident gender was associated with differences in faculty assessments of resident performance, and differences were linked to PGY. In contrast to male residents' scores, female residents' scores displayed a peak-and-plateau pattern whereby assessment scores peaked in PGY2. Notably, the peak-and-plateau pattern was seen in assessments by male and female faculty. Further study of factors that influence gender-based differences in assessment is needed.

Faculty knowledge and attitudes regarding predatory open access journals: a needs assessment study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of predatory open access (OA) journals is primarily to make a profit rather than to disseminate quality, peer-reviewed research. Publishing in these journals could negatively impact faculty reputation, promotion, and tenure, yet many still choose to do so. Therefore, the authors investigated faculty knowledge and attitudes regarding predatory OA journals. METHODS: A twenty-item questionnaire containing both quantitative and qualitative items was developed and piloted. All university and medical school faculty were invited to participate. The survey included knowledge questions that assessed respondents' ability to identify predatory OA journals and attitudinal questions about such journals. Chi-square tests were used to detect differences between university and medical faculty. RESULTS: A total of 183 faculty completed the survey: 63% were university and 37% were medical faculty. Nearly one-quarter (23%) had not previously heard of the term "predatory OA journal." Most (87%) reported feeling very confident or confident in their ability to assess journal quality, but only 60% correctly identified a journal as predatory, when given a journal in their field to assess. Chi-square tests revealed that university faculty were more likely to correctly identify a predatory OA journal (p=0.0006) and have higher self-reported confidence in assessing journal quality, compared with medical faculty (p=0.0391). CONCLUSIONS: Survey results show that faculty recognize predatory OA journals as a problem. These attitudes plus the knowledge gaps identified in this study will be used to develop targeted educational interventions for faculty in all disciplines at our university.

Effectiveness and Needs Assessment of Faculty Development Programme for Medical Education: Experience from Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: Faculty members are the most important resource in any institution of higher education as medical education has been, and continues to be, a priority for medical colleges in Saudi Arabia. This study aimed to assess faculty members' perceptions of faculty development programmes (FDPs) in supporting important goals in medical education. In addition, this study aimed to assess faculty members' perceived needs. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted between August 2016 and August 2017 and involved participants from six universities in Saudi Arabia's Western Province. The survey consisted of 31 items designed to assess FDP effectiveness and 49 items designed to assess needs in FDPs. RESULTS: A total of 210 faculty members participated in the study (response rate = 52.5%) and identified 49 needs. Faculty members perceived personal improvement in delivering medical education and the provision of greater educational involvement as the most effective considerations in an FDP. The respondents considered 13 needs to be of utmost importance; the remaining were considered important. CONCLUSION: This study assessed and identified faculty needs and important skills to consider when establishing an FDP. Furthermore, it provided information addressing the needs of, or gaps between, current and desired conditions in medical education in Saudi Arabia. The study also identified the most important elements (i.e. personal improvement) of faculty-perceived effectiveness for a successful FDP in medical education.

Medication management in older adults and interprofessional education: A needs assessment.

Elderly, multi-morbid patients are at high risk for suffering adverse drug events. Safe medication management is a key process in preventing these adverse events, and requires interprofessional teamwork. We performed a needs assessment survey of graduating medical students and faculty to evaluate student training in medication management, in particular students' preparedness in the three minimum geriatrics competencies pertaining to medication management, interprofessional educational opportunities, and optimal learning methods. Response rates were 45/105 (43%) for students and 38/93 (41%) for faculty. The majority of students felt that they did not receive sufficient training in medication management in older adults. Faculty either agreed with students or were unsure whether students received sufficient training. Neither students nor faculty felt that students were extremely prepared to carry out the three minimum geriatrics competencies at the time of medical school graduation. Students and faculty identified direct patient care experiences as the optimal learning method, and inappropriate medications as the highest priority topic. Students and faculty felt that students do not receive sufficient interprofessional educational opportunities. The results of this study are currently being used to create customized interprofessional educational experiences for medical students related to medication management in older adults.