ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Most formal continuing professional development (CPD) opportunities were offered in person until March 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional structures of CPD offerings. The authors explored the adaptations and innovations in CPD that were strengthened or newly created during the first 16 months of the pandemic. METHODS: The objectives of the narrative review were to answer the following questions: (1) what types of adaptations to CPD innovations are described? and (2) what may shape future innovations in CPD? The following databases were searched: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ERIC to identify the literature published between March 2020 to July 2021. The authors conducted a comprehensive search by including all study types that described adaptations and/or innovations in CPD during the stated pandemic period. RESULTS: Of the 8295 citations retrieved from databases, 191 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The authors found three categories to describe adaptations to CPD innovations: (1) creation of new online resources, (2) increased use of the existing online platforms/software to deliver CPD, and (3) use of simulation for teaching and learning. Reported advantages and disadvantages associated with these adaptations included logistical, interactional, and capacity building elements. The review identified five potential future CPD innovations: (1) empirical research on the effectiveness of virtual learning; (2) novel roles and ways of thinking; (3) learning from other disciplines beyond medicine; (4) formation of a global perspective; and (5) emerging wellness initiatives. DISCUSSION: This review provided an overview of the adaptations and innovations that may shape the future of CPD beyond the pandemic.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) and the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire-Junior (SIQ-Jr) were designed to capture suicidal ideation in adolescents and are often used in clinical trials. Our aim was to identify and appraise the published literature with respect to the validity, reliability, responsiveness, and interpretability of the SIQ and SIQ-Jr. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to identify, appraise, and synthesize published literature on measurement properties and interpretability of the SIQ and SIQ-Jr. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 16, 2023, to identify sources relevant to our aim. RESULTS: We identified 15 sources meeting our eligibility criteria. The body of literature did not meet COSMIN standards to make recommendations for use with regard to these measurement instruments. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed, with a focus on content validity and structural validity, prior to recommending the SIQ and SIQ-Jr for use in clinical practice and in clinical trials. No specific grant funding was used for this review.
ABSTRACT
The lack of both women and physicians from groups under-represented in medicine (UIM) in leadership has become a growing concern in healthcare. Despite increasing recognition that diversity in physician leadership can lead to reduced health disparities, improved population health and increased innovation and creativity in organisations, progress toward this goal is slow. One strategy for increasing the number of women and UIM physician leaders has been to create professional development opportunities that include leadership training on equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI). However, the extent to which these concepts are explored in physician leadership programming is not known. It is also not clear whether this EDI content challenges structural barriers that perpetuate the status quo of white male leadership. To explore these issues, we conducted an environmental scan by adapting Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology to centre on three questions: How is EDI currently presented in physician leadership programming? How have these programmes been evaluated in the peer-reviewed literature? How is EDI presented and discussed by the wider medical community? We scanned institutional websites for physician leadership programmes, analysed peer-reviewed literature and examined material from medical education conferences. Our findings indicate that despite an apparent increase in the discussion of EDI concepts in the medical community, current physician leadership programming is built on theories that fail to move beyond race and gender as explanatory factors for a lack of diversity in physician leadership. To address inequity, physician leadership curricula should aim to equip physicians to identify and address the structural factors that perpetuate disparities.
Subject(s)
Education, Medical , Physicians , Cultural Diversity , Curriculum , Female , Humans , Leadership , MaleABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Digital health resources are being increasingly used to support women with substance use concerns. Although empirical research has demonstrated that these resources have promise, the available evidence for their benefit in women requires further investigation. Evidence supports the capacity of interventions that are sex-, gender-, and trauma-informed to improve treatment access and outcomes and to reduce health system challenges and disparities. Indeed, both sex- and gender-specific approaches are critical to improve health and gender equity. Violence and trauma are frequent among those with substance use concerns, but they disproportionately affect those who identify as female or women, further underscoring the need for trauma-informed care as well. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the evidence supporting the efficacy or effectiveness of online or mobile interventions for risky or harmful substance use in adults who identify as female or women, or who report a history of trauma. METHODS: This scoping review is based on an academic search in MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL, as well as a grey literature search in US and Canadian government and funding agency websites. Of the 7807 records identified, 465 remained following title and abstract screening. Of these, 159 met all eligibility criteria and were reviewed and synthesized. RESULTS: The 159 records reflected 141 distinct studies and 125 distinct interventions. Investigations and the interventions evaluated predominantly focused on alcohol use or general substance use. Evaluated digital health resources included multisession and brief-session interventions, with a wide range of therapeutic elements. Multisession online and mobile interventions exhibited beneficial effects in 86.1% (105/122) of studies. Single-session interventions similarly demonstrated beneficial effects in 64.2% (43/67) of study conditions. Most investigations did not assess gender identity or conduct sex- or gender-based analyses. Only 13 investigations that included trauma were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the overall promise of digital health interventions for substance use concerns, direct or quantitative evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of interventions in females or women specifically is weak.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The research tested the authors' hypothesis that more researchers from the academic medicine community in the United States and Canada with institutional access to Embase had started using Embase to replace MEDLINE since Embase was expanded in 2010 to cover all MEDLINE records. METHODS: We contacted libraries of 140 and 17 medical schools in the United States and Canada, respectively, to confirm their subscriptions to Embase 5 years before and 5 years after 2010. We searched the names of institutions with confirmed Embase access in Ovid MEDLINE and Embase to retrieve works authored by affiliates of those institutions. We then examined 100 randomly selected records from each of the 5 years before and 5 years after the Embase coverage expansion in 2010. We hypothesized that studies that used Embase but not MEDLINE would increase due to the Embase coverage expansion. RESULTS: The number of studies that used Embase but not MEDLINE did not change between the pre-2010 and post-2010 periods. CONCLUSION: Our hypothesis was refuted. Studies that used Embase but not MEDLINE did not increase post-2010. Our results suggest the academic medicine community in the United States and Canada that had access did not use Embase to replace MEDLINE, despite the Embase coverage expansion.