An Examination of the Intersection of Climate Change, the Physician Specialty Workforce, and Graduate Medical Education in the U.S.

Issue: As U.S. healthcare systems plan for future physician workforce needs, the systemic impacts of climate change, a worldwide environmental and health crisis, have not been factored in. The current focus on increasing the number of trained physicians and optimizing efficiencies in healthcare delivery may be insufficient. Graduate medical education (GME) priorities and training should be considered in order to prepare a climate-educated physician workforce. Evidence: We used a holistic lens to explore the available literature regarding the intersection of future physician workforce needs, GME program priorities, and resident education within the larger context of climate change. Our interinstitutional, transdisciplinary team brought perspectives from their own fields, including climate science, climate and health research, and medical education to provide recommendations for building a climate-educated physician workforce. Implications: Acknowledging and preparing for the effects of climate change on the physician workforce will require identification of workforce gaps, changes to GME program priorities, and education of trainees on the health and societal impacts of climate change. Alignment of GME training with workforce considerations and climate action and adaptation initiatives will be critical in ensuring the U.S. has a climate-educated physician workforce capable of addressing health and healthcare system challenges. This article offers a number of recommendations for physician workforce priorities, resident education, and system-level changes to better prepare for the health and health system impacts of climate change.

Differentiated Instruction as a Viable Framework for Meeting the Needs of Diverse Adult Learners in Health Professions Education.

Health professions education (HPE) instructors are often challenged with simultaneously teaching adult learners of varying educational levels, needs, and backgrounds. With an increased focus on interprofessional education, instructors may be tasked with teaching extremely diverse audiences during a single educational session. While some aspects of differentiated instruction (DI) have been implemented within HPE contexts, the DI framework appears to be relatively unknown in many fields. Evidence from a range of educational fields outside of HPE supports the use of DI as a framework to enhance fairness, diversity and inclusion while meeting core instructional needs. In this Monograph, we explore DI and offer strategies for implementation amenable to many HPE settings.

An Examination of Resident Perspectives on Survey Participation and Methodology: Implications for Educational Practice and Research.

BACKGROUND: In medical education, self-administered questionnaires are used to gather information for needs assessments, innovation projects, program evaluations, and research studies. Despite the importance of survey methodology, response rates have declined for years, especially for physicians. OBJECTIVE: This study explored residents' experiences with survey participation and perceptions of survey design and implementation. METHODS: In 2019, residents at a large Midwestern academic medical center were recruited via email to participate in mixed specialty focus groups (FGs). Narrative comments were recorded, transcribed, and then analyzed via conventional content analysis, utilizing cognitive sociology as a conceptual framework. Themes and subthemes were generated iteratively. RESULTS: Postgraduate year 1-4 residents (n = 33) from internal medicine, surgery, and neurology participated in 7 FGs (3-7 participants/group) from April-May 2019. Eight themes were generated during content analysis: Negative emotions, professionalism, accuracy, impact, survey design/implementation, biases, survey fatigue, and anonymity. Residents questioned the accuracy of survey data, given the tendency for self-selection to drive survey participation. Residents wanted survey participation to be meaningful and reported non-participation for a variety of reasons, including doubts over impact. Satisficing and breakoffs were commonly reported. CONCLUSIONS: Though residency program cultures differ across institutions, the findings from this study, including potential barriers to survey participation, should be relevant to anyone in graduate medical education using survey methodology for programmatic data collection, accreditation, and research purposes.