Identifying Gender and Racial Bias in Pediatric Fellowship Letters of Recommendation: Do Word Choices Influence Interview Decisions?

OBJECTIVES: To describe linguistic differences in letters of recommendation (LORs) for pediatric fellowship candidates based on applicant and letter writer demographics and to examine if these differences influenced the decision to interview a candidate for a fellowship position. STUDY DESIGN: LORs for applicants to 8 pediatric subspecialty fellowships at a single academic center from the 2020 Match were analyzed in this cross-sectional study. Frequency of validated agentic and communal terms in each letter were determined by a language processing web application. Bias was determined as having a >5% surplus of agentic or communal terms. RESULTS: We analyzed 1521 LORs from 409 applicants: 69% were women, 28% were under-represented minorities in medicine (URM), and 50% were invited to interview. Overall, 66% of LORs were agentic biased, 16% communal biased, and 19% neutral. There was no difference in bias in LORs by an applicant's gender (woman 67% agentic vs man 62% agentic; P = .058), race, or ethnicity (non-URM 65% agentic vs URM 67% agentic; P = .660). Despite a lower frequency of agentic terms in LORs for applicants invited for interviews, when accounting for other components of an application and applicant demographics, no significant association was made between language bias in LORs and fellowship interview status. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of agentic and communal terms in LORs for pediatric subspecialty fellowship candidates were not found to influence the decision to invite a candidate to interview. However, raising awareness of potential areas of bias within the pediatric fellowship selection process might lead to a more equitable and holistic approach to application review.

A quality improvement approach to integrating social determinants of health objectives into pediatric simulation.

Background: Health disparities and the unequal distribution of social resources impact health outcomes. By considering social determinants of health (SDH), clinicians can provide holistic and equitable care. However, barriers such as lack of time or understanding of the relevance of SDH to patient care prevent providers from addressing SDH. Simulation curricula may improve learners' ability to address SDH in practice. Objectives: The primary objective was to increase the percentage of pediatric emergency simulations that included SDH objectives from 5% to 50% in 12 months at one institution. As a balancing metric, we examined whether trainees approved the incorporation of SDH objectives. Methods: Using the Model for Improvement approach, we conducted interviews of residents and simulation facilitators to identify challenges to integrating SDH objectives into the simulation curriculum. Review of interviews and visual representation of the system helped identify key drivers in the process. A team of simulation leaders, residents, and fellows met regularly to develop simulation cases with embedded SDH objectives. Using a plan, do, study, act approach, we tested, refined, and implemented interventions including engaging residency program and SDH leadership, piloting cases, providing facilitators concise resources, inviting SDH-specific experts to co-debrief, and eliciting and incorporating learner and facilitator feedback to improve cases. SDH topics include homelessness, undocumented status, and racism. Results: Prior to the start of the quality improvement work, SDH were rarely incorporated into emergency simulations for pediatric residents. A p-chart was used to track the percentage of monthly cases that incorporated SDH topics. During the study period, the percentage of simulations including SDH topics increased to 57% per month. Most trainees (94%) welcomed incorporating SDH objectives. Conclusions: Using the Model for Improvement, we incorporated SDH objectives into pediatric resident emergency simulations. Next steps include examining effectiveness of the curriculum, dissemination to additional learners, and examining sustainability in practice.

A QI Partnership to Decrease CT Use for Pediatric Appendicitis in the Community Hospital Setting.

The primary aim of this quality improvement initiative was to decrease the use of computerized tomography (CT) in the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis in a community general emergency department (GED) system by 50% (from 32% to 16%) in 1 year. METHODS: Colleagues within a State Emergency Medical Service for Children (EMSC) community of practice formed the quality improvement team, representing multiple stakeholders across 3 independent institutions. The team generated project aims by reviewing baseline practice trends and implemented changes using the Model for Improvement. Ultrasound (US) use and nondiagnostic US rates served as process measures. Transfer and "over-transfer" rates served as balancing measures. Interventions included a GED pediatric appendicitis clinical pathway, US report templates, and case audit and feedback. Statistical process control tracked the main outcomes. Additionally, frontline GED providers shared perceptions of knowledge gains, practice changes, and teamwork. RESULTS: The 12-month baseline revealed a GED CT scan rate of 32%, a US rate of 63%, a nondiagnostic US rate of 77%, a transfer to a children's hospital rate of 23.5%, and an "over-transfer" rate of 0%. Project interventions achieved and sustained the primary aim by decreasing the CT scan rate to 4.5%. Frontline GED providers reported positive perceptions of knowledge gains and standardization of practice. CONCLUSIONS: Engaging regional colleagues in a pediatric-specific quality improvement initiative significantly decreased CT scan use in children cared for in a community GED system. The emphasis on the community of practice facilitated by Emergency Medical Service for Children may guide future improvement work in the state and beyond.

The greater good: how supervising physicians make entrustment decisions in the pediatric emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Graduate medical education is transitioning to the use of entrustable professional activities to contextualize educational competencies. Factors influencing entrustment decisions have been reported in adult medicine. Knowing how such decisions are made in pediatrics is critical to this transition. PURPOSE: To understand how supervisors determine the level of procedural supervision to provide a resident, taking into consideration simulation performance; to understand factors that affect supervisors' transparency to parents about residents' procedural experience. METHODS: We conducted 18 one-on-one interviews with supervisors in a tertiary care pediatric emergency department, iteratively revising interview questions as patterns in the data were elucidated. Two researchers independently coded transcripts and then met with the investigative team to refine codes and create themes. RESULTS: Five factors influenced supervisors' entrustment decisions: 1) resident characteristics that include self-reported confidence, seniority, and prior interactions with the resident; 2) supervisor style; 3) nature of the procedure/characteristics of the patient; 4) environmental factors; and 5) parental preferences. Supervisors thought that task-based simulators provided practice opportunities but that simulated performance did not provide evidence for entrustment. Supervisors reported selectively omitting details about a resident's experience level to families to optimize experiential learning for residents they entrusted to perform a procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In pediatrics, supervisors consider various factors when making decisions regarding resident procedural readiness, including parental preferences. An educational system using entrustable professional activities may facilitate holistic assessment and foster expertise-informed decisions about residents' progression toward entrustment; such a system may also lessen supervisors' need to omit information to parents about residents' procedural readiness.