Designing a Road Map for Action to Address Bias and Racism Within a Large Academic Medical Center.

ABSTRACT: The convergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Black Lives Matter Movement, and the public anguish and outrage resulting from the murder of George Floyd in 2020 intensified the commitment of many health care institutions to pursue racial and social justice and achieve health equity. The authors describe the Road Map for Action to Address Racism, which was developed to unify and systematize antiracism efforts across the Mount Sinai Health System. A 51-member Task Force to Address Racism, comprising faculty, staff, students, alumni, health system leaders, and trustees, developed recommendations to achieve the goal of becoming an antiracist and equitable health care and learning institution by intentionally addressing all forms of racism and promoting greater diversity, inclusion, and equity for its workforce and community. Grounded in the principles of Collective Impact, the Task Force developed a set of 11 key strategies to effect systemwide change. The strategies affected all aspects of the organization: business systems and financial operations, delivery of care, workforce development and training, leadership development, medical education, and community engagement. The authors describe Road Map implementation, currently in process, including the appointment of strategy leaders, evolution of a governance structure integrating stakeholders from across the health system, development of an evaluation framework, communication and engagement efforts, and process measures and progress to date. Lessons learned include the importance of recognizing the work of dismantling racism as integral to, not apart from, the institution's day-to-day work, and the need for specialized expertise and a significant investment of time to coordinate Road Map implementation. Going forward, rigorous assessment of quantitative and qualitative outcomes and a commitment to sharing successes and challenges will be critical to eradicating systems that have perpetuated inequities in the biomedical sciences and medicine and in the delivery of health care.

Bias Breakers: Continuous Practice for Admissions and Selection Committees.

Introduction: Admissions and selection committees face challenges in identifying and mitigating biases in policies, processes, and discussions. Past bias training has focused on defining bias and presenting the negative impact of bias for committees. Methods: This interactive training used committee comments, reflection, and audience response to enhance the contextual recognition of bias in admissions and selection processes and practices. For each bias type, we presented specific mitigation strategies and examples. The workshop was offered at four medical schools between December 2020 and April 2021. Participants were committee members (n = 126), largely medical school faculty, involved in MD, MD/PhD, and residency program selection at participating schools. A paired pre- and postworkshop assessment was conducted for each session to determine effectiveness of the workshop. Results: Mean scores for each of the postassessment items ranged from 4.0 to 4.2 and were statistically significantly different from the preassessment scores per respective item. The results of a paired two-way t test found that these pre- to postworkshop assessment score increases were statistically significant across all assessment questions (ps < .001). Participants reported in their comments that the workshop was effective in establishing a safe and judgment-free learning environment to explore and identify biases and build skills and confidence for mitigating them. Discussion: Interactive and applied bias training can be an effective strategy to advance committee culture and practice in recognizing and mitigating bias. This workshop provides committees with ongoing tools for equity practice in selection and decision-making.

Integrated Holistic Student Affairs: A Personalized, Equitable, Student-Centered Approach to Student Affairs.

Medical education has reached a critical juncture-the structural racism that has permeated the fabric of its systems and institutions for centuries can no longer be ignored. The destructive, disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and unabated violence targeting individuals who are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) exact an incalculable toll on BIPOC students and students from other groups that are historically underrepresented in medicine (UIM). Failing to recognize and act on the well-documented differential experience of BIPOC medical students impedes medical educators' ability to cultivate learning environments where all learners have an equitable opportunity to thrive. Holistic review admission processes, now widely accepted, have challenged admissions committees to consider the "whole applicant" to diversify matriculating classes. While gaining admission is critical, it is merely the first step for BIPOC students, who may face marginalization within what the authors have termed a "sink-or-swim" culture in medical education. For the tremendous potential afforded by holistic review to be realized, the medical education community must extend the holistic approach throughout the medical education continuum, beginning with student affairs practices and support. The authors propose the use of Integrated Holistic Student Affairs (IHSA), a systems-based model that fosters the reexamining and reengineering of existing student affairs structures, policies, and processes to promote a personalized, equitable student-centered approach. The IHSA Model consists of 4 strategic actions-establish vertical and horizontal collaboration, conduct systems thinking analysis, target leverage points for change, and operationalize the change process-and 4 areas of priority for collaboration with student diversity affairs staff and faculty. The IHSA Model provides student affairs staff and faculty with a framework for shifting from reactive, deficit-oriented practices to proactive, empowering, equitable practices, with the goal of allowing BIPOC and all other UIM students to thrive during their journey from matriculation to graduation.

Social Determinants, Risk Factors, and Needs: A New Paradigm for Medical Education.

COVID-19 and the escalation of racism and bias that has come in its wake have had a devastating impact on health professions students. In addition to academic challenges and personal health risks, aspects of students' lives that have often gone unnoticed or inadequately addressed have come to light. Financial constraints that impact access to housing and food, neighborhood safety in light of the spike in hate crimes, and the bias inherent in the continuum from premedical education to undergraduate and graduate medical education are some examples. The authors believe that to better understand students' lived experiences and determine how to best support them, the social determinants of health framework should be applied. This framework, the social determinants of education, encompasses concepts such as social risk factors and social needs in an effort to focus more intentionally on what can be done at a policy, institutional, and individual level. In response to the pandemic, the authors expanded their appreciation of students' risk factors and needs by advancing the scope and refining the definitions of 3 key determinants: from well-being to the power of individual and communal resilience, from equity to centering racial justice, and from student health to public health and infection prevention. The authors propose applying this same paradigm to the lived experiences of staff in medical education, whose needs are often neglected in favor of students and faculty, and who, in many cases, were the most negatively impacted by COVID-19 of all the constituents in an academic health center.

Addressing and Undoing Racism and Bias in the Medical School Learning and Work Environment.

Racism and bias are American medicine's fatal flaw. They permeate clinical practice and biomedical research, and their influence on medical education is even more profound because it is through medical education that racism and bias are perpetuated across generations and throughout history. This insidious influence has persisted despite the stated values of the medical profession and well-intentioned efforts to lessen their impact. The authors assert that racism and bias in the learning and work environment of medical school can be mitigated only through a formal change management process that leads to change that is institutionally transformational and individually transformative. The authors describe the sequence of events at one U.S. medical school, beginning in 2016, that led from student activism to an initiative that encompasses every functional sphere within medical education. They also reflect on personal and structural lessons learned during the course of designing and implementing this initiative. Eliminating racism and bias demands that medical educators embrace a change process that is lifelong, people-centered, incremental, and nonlinear. It requires the courage to constantly course correct while never losing sight of the ultimate goal: health care and medical education that are free of racism and bias.

Suspending Student Selections to Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society: How One School Is Navigating the Intersection of Equity and Wellness.

Medical education must provide students with a delicate balance of academic rigor, equity, and wellness. While the medical education community espouses all these values, the authors believe the way medical students are evaluated and rewarded undermines equity and wellness. Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society (AΩA) membership is arguably the highest honor that a medical student can achieve. In the short term, it opens doors to the most selective training opportunities, and in the long term, ushers students into an elite group of future physician leaders. Yet recent data have demonstrated that AΩA is disproportionately awarded to white students.At Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS), the authors observed that students underrepresented in science and medicine were persistently underrepresented among those selected for AΩA. They describe efforts at ISMMS to reduce bias in the selection process and the ultimate decision to suspend medical student selection for AΩA altogether. The authors argue that selection to AΩA reinforces the structural biases and social privilege that are embedded in medical education and undermines the ability to deliver an educational experience that has as its core tenets equity and wellness. Suspending participation in student selection for AΩA is an important step toward recognizing that medical school learning environments continue to privilege white students over students who are underrepresented in medicine.

The Science and Value of Diversity: Closing the Gaps in Our Understanding of Inclusion and Diversity.

Diversity drives excellence. Diversity enhances innovation in biomedical sciences and, as it relates to novel findings and treatment of diverse populations, in the field of infectious diseases. There are many obstacles to achieving diversity in the biomedical workforce, which create challenges at the levels of recruitment, retention, education, and promotion of individuals. Here we present the challenges, opportunities, and suggestions for the field, institutions, and individuals to adopt in mitigating bias and achieving greater levels of equity, representation, and excellence in clinical practice and research. Our findings provide optimism for a bright future of fair and collaborative approaches that will enhance the power of our biomedical workforce.

The ASIBS Short Course: A unique strategy for increasing statistical competency of junior investigators in academic medicine.

As clinical researchers at academic medical institutions across the United States increasingly manage complex clinical databases and registries, they often lack the statistical expertise to utilize the data for research purposes. This statistical inadequacy prevents junior investigators from disseminating clinical findings in peer-reviewed journals and from obtaining research funding, thereby hindering their potential for promotion. Underrepresented minorities, in particular, confront unique challenges as clinical investigators stemming from a lack of methodologically rigorous research training in their graduate medical education. This creates a ripple effect for them with respect to acquiring full-time appointments, obtaining federal research grants, and promotion to leadership positions in academic medicine. To fill this major gap in the statistical training of junior faculty and fellows, the authors developed the Applied Statistical Independence in Biological Systems (ASIBS) Short Course. The overall goal of ASIBS is to provide formal applied statistical training, via a hybrid distance and in-person learning format, to junior faculty and fellows actively involved in research at US academic medical institutions, with a special emphasis on underrepresented minorities. The authors present an overview of the design and implementation of ASIBS, along with a short-term evaluation of its impact for the first cohort of ASIBS participants.

The Human Rights and Social Justice Scholars Program: a collaborative model for preclinical training in social medicine.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of the role social justice takes in medical professionalism, the need to train health professionals to address social determinants of health, and medical trainees' desire to eliminate health disparities, undergraduate medical education offers few opportunities for comprehensive training in social justice. The Human Rights and Social Justice (HRSJ) Scholars Program at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai is a preclinical training program in social medicine consisting of 5 components: a didactic course, faculty and student mentorship, research projects in social justice, longitudinal policy and advocacy service projects, and a career seminar series. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to describe the design and implementation of the HRSJ curriculum with a focus on the cornerstone of the HRSJ Scholars Program: longitudinal policy and advocacy service projects implemented in collaboration with partner organizations in East Harlem. Furthermore, we describe the results of a qualitative survey of inaugural participants, now third-year medical students, to understand how their participation in this service-learning component affected their clinical experiences and professional self-perceptions. CONCLUSION: Ultimately, through the implementation and evaluation of the HRSJ Scholars Program, we demonstrate an innovative model for social justice education; the enduring effect of service-learning experiences on participants' knowledge, skills, and attitudes; and the potential to increase community capacity for improved health through a collaborative educational model.

Role of institutional climate in fostering diversity in biomedical research workforce: a case study.

This article reviews the barriers to diversity in biomedical research and describes the evolution of efforts to address climate issues to enhance the ability to attract, retain, and develop underrepresented minorities, whose underrepresentation is found both in science and medicine, in the graduate-school biomedical research doctoral programs (PhD and MD/PhD) at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. We also describe the potential beneficial impact of having a climate that supports diversity and inclusion in the biomedical research workforce. The Mount Sinai School of Medicine diversity-climate efforts are discussed as part of a comprehensive plan to increase diversity in all institutional programs: PhD, MD/PhD, and MD, and at the residency, postdoctoral fellow, and faculty levels. Lessons learned from 4 decades of targeted programs and activities at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine may be of value to other institutions interested in improving diversity in the biomedical science and academic medicine workforce.

Community engagement in research: frameworks for education and peer review.

Community engagement in research may enhance a community's ability to address its own health needs and health disparities issues while ensuring that researchers understand community priorities. However, there are researchers with limited understanding of and experience with effective methods of engaging communities. Furthermore, limited guidance is available for peer-review panels on evaluating proposals for research that engages communities. The National Institutes of Health Director's Council of Public Representatives developed a community engagement framework that includes values, strategies to operationalize each value, and potential outcomes of their use, as well as a peer-review framework for evaluating research that engages communities. Use of these frameworks for educating researchers to create and sustain authentic community-academic partnerships will increase accountability and equality between the partners.

The role of social and community service in medical education: the next 100 years.

Abraham Flexner's focus on science in medical school curricula was not intended to exclude or marginalize the importance of service in training American physicians. The erosion of service in academic medicine in the century after his report was the result of forces as wide ranging as research priorities, health care financing, and industry's influence. The authors review the historical context of these changes and make the case that reintroducing service into medical school curricula has never been more important. They describe the impact that neglecting service has had on society, patients, the medical profession, medical students, and medical education. After defining what is meant by social, public, or community service, they go on to detail signature programs at University of Texas Medical Branch, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, focusing on the two major categories of health care delivery and education. These examples, in geographically and demographically disparate schools of medicine, demonstrate that it is possible to successfully reintegrate service into the missions of academic medical centers and medical schools.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 6 successful programs in minority faculty development: ingredients of success.

This article describes the ingredients of successful programs for the development of minority faculty in academic medicine. Although stung by recent cuts in federal funding, minority faculty development programs now stand as models for medical schools that are eager to join the 140-year-old quest for diversity in academic medicine. In this article, the ingredients of these successful faculty development programs are discussed by experts in minority faculty development and illustrated by institutional examples. Included are descriptions of program goals and content, mentoring and coaching, selecting participants, providing a conducive environment, managing the program, and sustaining support. This article is a companion to another article, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Overview," in this issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 5 successful programs in minority faculty development: overview.

Despite recent drastic cutbacks in federal funding for programs to diversify academic medicine, many such programs survive and continue to set examples for others of how to successfully increase the participation of minorities underrepresented in the healthcare professions and, in particular, how to increase physician and nonphysician minority medical faculty. This article provides an overview of such programs, including those in historically black colleges and universities, minority-serving institutions, research-intensive private and public medical schools, and more primary care-oriented public medical schools. Although the models for faculty development developed by these successful schools overlap, each has unique features worthy of consideration by other schools seeking to develop programs of their own. The ingredients of success are discussed in detail in another article in this theme issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Ingredients of Success."

The role of community-academic partnerships: implications for medical education, research, and patient care.

PROBLEM: Despite several studies demonstrating the benefits of community-academic partnerships, their value to academic health centers (AHCs) is often viewed with skepticism by some in the academic community. PURPOSE: This paper examines the roles of community organizations and the mechanisms by which they can enhance the AHC missions of education, research, and patient care. KEY POINTS: As lay educators, community organizations can contribute to medical education by exposing students to diverse cultural perspectives. As community advocates, they can facilitate the research process by helping to frame culturally relevant research questions, by ensuring that research survey instruments are culturally and linguistically appropriate, and that research findings are disseminated to community stakeholders. As lay health workers, they can facilitate health care delivery by providing a link to hard-to-reach populations through their outreach and referral initiatives. CONCLUSION: Forming partnerships between community organizations and AHCs can support the missions of AHCs and simultaneously develop and strengthen community capacity.

Challenges and facilitating factors in sustaining community-based participatory research partnerships: lessons learned from the Detroit, New York City and Seattle Urban Research Centers.

In order to address the social, physical and economic determinants of urban health, researchers, public health practitioners, and community members have turned to more comprehensive and participatory approaches to research and interventions. One such approach, community-based participatory research (CBPR) in public health, has received considerable attention over the past decade, and numerous publications have described theoretical underpinnings, values, principles and practice. Issues related to the long-term sustainability of partnerships and activities have received limited attention. The purpose of this article is to examine the experiences and lessons learned from three Urban Research Centers (URCs) in Detroit, New York City, and Seattle, which were initially established in 1995 with core support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The experience of these Centers after core funding ceased in 2003 provides a case study to identify the challenges and facilitating factors for sustaining partnerships. We examine three broad dimensions of CBPR partnerships that we consider important for sustainability: (1) sustaining relationships and commitments among the partners involved; (2) sustaining the knowledge, capacity and values generated from the partnership; and (3) sustaining funding, staff, programs, policy changes and the partnership itself. We discuss the challenges faced by the URCs in sustaining these dimensions and the strategies used to overcome these challenges. Based on these experiences, we offer recommendations for: strategies that partnerships may find useful in sustaining their CBPR efforts; ways in which a Center mechanism can be useful for promoting sustainability; and considerations for funders of CBPR to increase sustainability.

Addressing urban health in Detroit, New York City, and Seattle through community-based participatory research partnerships.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes key activities integral to the development of 3 community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships. METHODS: We compared findings from individual case studies conducted at 3 urban research centers (URCs) to identify crosscutting adaptations of a CBPR approach in the first 4 years of the partnerships' development. RESULTS: Activities critical in partnership development include sharing decision-making, defining principles of collaboration, establishing research priorities, and securing funding. Intermediate outcomes were sustained CBPR partnerships, trust within the partnerships, public health research programs, and increased capacity to conduct CBPR. Challenges included the time needed for meaningful collaboration, concerns regarding sustainable funding, and issues related to institutional racism. CONCLUSIONS: The URC experiences suggest that CBPR can be successfully implemented in diverse settings.

Access to resources for substance users in Harlem, New York City: service provider and client perspectives.

The Urban Research Center (URC) in Harlem, New York City, is a collaboration of community members, service providers, and academics. A Community Advisory Board (CAB) meets regularly to formulate priorities for action and to direct research. A conceptual model of social determinants of health relevant to the Harlem community was developed. Early meetings of the CAB identified substance use as a health concern in the Harlem community. Access to social services was identified as a key social determinant that should guide research and intervention efforts of the URC. Surveys of service providers and of substance users were carried out to quantify availability of information and barriers to access. This article discusses the CAB process that led to the model of social determinants, development of surveys, and interpretation of results. The authors also discuss survey results and how the URC will use these results to develop interventions.