Development and delivery of justice, equity, diversity, inclusion, and anti-oppression concepts in entry-level health professional education: A scoping review: BEME Guide No. 88.

PURPOSE: Justice, equity, diversity, inclusion (JEDI), and anti-oppression (AO) concepts are necessary in healthcare settings to promote culturally safe and high-quality care; however, entry-level healthcare program curricula (EHPPC) may lack adequate integration and/or delivery of these concepts. The primary aim of this scoping review is to identify what guidelines, frameworks, and models (GFMs) are used, and how they are used, to develop and deliver JEDI, and AO concepts in mandatory EHPPC. METHODS: A search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and CINAHL was conducted for studies published in English from 2015 onwards that discuss what GFMs are included in mandatory EHPPC and how they guide the development and/or delivery of JEDI and/or AO concepts. Data from the included studies was collated into themes which were presented in tables and figures and described in narrative summaries. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies from various healthcare programs including medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, and dietetics were included in this review. Data from the studies were organized into eight categories: GFMs, concepts, methods of evaluation, length and frequency of sessions, modes of delivery, learning activities, and training of curricular developers and facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: GFMs are used in a variety of ways to integrate JEDI and/or AO concepts into health professional curriculum. Variability in the training of developers and facilitators of curricular concepts also exists. Future research is needed to determine if consistent or variable GFMs, as well as JEDI and/or AO developer and facilitator training, would be more effective for students' learning of these concepts.

Development and delivery of justice, equity, diversity, inclusion, and anti-oppression concepts in entry-level health professional education: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to identify the frameworks, guidelines, and models used to develop and deliver justice, equity, diversity, inclusion (JEDI), and anti-oppression (AO) principles in mandatory, entry-level health care professional program curricula (EHCPPC). A secondary objective will be to examine how these frameworks, guidelines, and models are used. INTRODUCTION: Health inequities are perpetuated globally, as observed by the suboptimal quality of care and health outcomes among equity-deserving groups. An understanding of JEDI and AO concepts is necessary in health care settings to promote culturally safe and high-quality care; however, entry-level health care programs may lack adequate integration of content and/or delivery of these principles. This scoping review will summarize the international literature on frameworks, guidelines, and models used to develop and deliver JEDI and AO concepts in EHCPPC. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider articles that discuss frameworks, models, or guidelines included in EHCPPC that guide the development and/or delivery of JEDI and AO principles in any country. Studies will be considered if they were published from 2015 to the present and are in English. All study designs will be considered for inclusion. METHODS: This review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. A search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) will be conducted. Two or more independent reviewers will assess titles and abstracts, screen full-text studies, and extract data from included studies. Data from the included studies will be collated into tables or figures and described in a narrative summary. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework osf.io/ewqf8.

Anchor Institutions: Best Practices to Address Social Needs and Social Determinants of Health.

"Anchor Institutions"-universities, hospitals, and other large, place-based organizations-invest in their communities as a way of doing business. Anchor "meds" (anchor institutions dedicated to health) that address social needs and social determinants of health have generated considerable community-based activity over the past several decades.Yet to date, virtually no research has analyzed their current status or effect on community health. To assess the current state and potential best practices of anchor meds, we conducted a search of the literature, a review of Web sites and related public documents of all declared anchor meds in the country, and interviews with 14 key informants.We identified potential best practices in adopting, operationalizing, and implementing an anchor mission and using specific social determinants of health strategies, noting early outcomes and lessons learned. Future dedicated research can bring heightened attention to this emerging force for community health.

Bankruptcy is the tip of a medical-debt iceberg.

Medical bankruptcy, whatever its actual frequency, is an extreme example of a much broader phenomenon. Medical debt is surprisingly common, affecting about twenty-nine million nonelderly adult Americans, with and without health insurance. The presence of medical debt, even for the insured, appears to create health care access barriers akin to those faced by the uninsured. Policymakers, researchers, and medical providers should consider medical debt a risk factor for reduced health access and poorer health status. Simply reducing the number of uninsured Americans would be a hollow policy victory if the problems arising from medical debt persist.