RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recent literature has suggested racial disparities in Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society (AΩA) selection and raised concerns about its effects on the learning environment. Internal reviews at multiple institutions have led to changes in selection practices or suspension of student chapters; in October 2020, the national AΩA organization provided guidance to address these concerns. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to better understand student opinions of AΩA. DESIGN: An anonymous survey using both multiple response option and free response questions. PARTICIPANTS: Medical students at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. MAIN MEASURES: Descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were used to examine predictors of student opinion towards AΩA. Free responses were analyzed by two independent coders to identify key themes. KEY RESULTS: In total, 70% of the student body (n = 547) completed the survey. Sixty-three percent had a negative opinion of AΩA, and 57% felt AΩA should not exist at the student level. Thirteen percent believed AΩA membership appropriately reflects the student body; 8% thought selection processes were fair. On multivariate analysis, negative predictors of a student's preference to continue AΩA at the student level included belief that AΩA membership does not currently mirror class composition (OR: 0.45, [95% CI: 0.23-0.89]) and that AΩA selection processes were unfair (OR: 0.20 [0.08-0.47]). Self-perception as not competitive for AΩA selection was also a negative predictor (OR: 0.44 [0.22-0.88]). Major qualitative themes included equity, impact on the learning environment, transparency, and positive aspects of AΩA. CONCLUSIONS: This single-institution survey demonstrated significant student concerns regarding AΩA selection fairness and effects on the learning environment. Many critiques extended beyond AΩA itself, instead focusing on the perceived magnification of existing disparities in the learning environment. As the national conversation about AΩA continues, engaging student voices in the discussion is critical.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Less than half of adults in the United States (US) obtain the recommended level of physical activity. Social incentives, the influences that impact individuals to adjust their behaviors based on social ties or connections, are ubiquitous and could be leveraged within gamification interventions to provide a scalable, low-cost approach to increase engagement. Gamification, or the use of game design in non-game situations, is commonly used in the real world, but in most cases has not appropriately leveraged principles from theories of health behavior. METHODS: We are conducting a four-arm, randomized, controlled trial of 602 overweight and obese adults to evaluate the effectiveness of gamification interventions that leverage insights from behavioral economics to enhance either supportive, competitive, or collaborative social incentives. Daily step counts are monitored using wearable devices that transmit data to the study platform. Participants established a baseline step count, selected a step goal increase, and then were randomly assigned to control or one of three interventions for a 24-week intervention and 12-week follow-up period. To understand predictors of strong or poor performance, we had participants complete validated questionnaires on a range of areas including their personality, risk preferences, social network, and habits relating to physical activity, eating, and sleep. Trial enrollment was conducted in partnership with Deloitte Consulting and included employees from 40 states across the US. CONCLUSION: The STEP UP Trial represents a scalable model and interventions found to be effective could be deployed more broadly to increase physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03311230.
