Perspectives of Historically Black College and University Advisors to Premedical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: Black students remain underrepresented in medicine despite national efforts to increase diversity in the physician workforce. Historically Black College and University (HBCU) students play a vital role in increasing representation in the workforce. Currently, there is a paucity of literature understanding the impact of COVID-19 on premedical students from HBCUs. Understanding the adverse impact of the pandemic on HBCU students is essential to inform strategies that promote holistic medical school admissions and increased diversity, equity, and inclusion in the medical workforce. Objective: To explore premedical advisors' perspectives on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HBCU premedical students pursuing admission to medical school. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, semistructured interviews of HBCU premedical advisors were performed from March 2020 to March 2021. One-on-one interviews were conducted with 21 advisors with a depth of experience as advisors, varied educational backgrounds, and diverse geographic representation. Data analysis was performed from March 2021 to December 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The experiences of HBCU premedical students during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of the premedical advisor. Results: Among the 21 participants, 13 (62%) were female, 15 (71%) were Black or African American, 11 (52%) had a doctorate degree, and 7 (33%) had more than 10 years of experience as advisors. Participants described 3 major themes: (1) balancing academic responsibilities with family demands; (2) distraction, disruption, and isolation in the virtual learning environment; and (3) harmful impact of new stressors for HBCU applicants in the medical school admissions process. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of HBCU advisors to premedical students, advisors described how the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected undergraduate HBCU premedical students; students faced family hardships, challenges with virtual learning, and uncertainty in the medical school admissions process. These findings suggest that medical schools should continue to create direct interventions to address the challenges that HBCU students faced during the height of the pandemic and as longitudinal consequences of the pandemic. Addressing these issues may improve physician workforce representation and promote more equitable patient care for underserved communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19 and other health disparities.

Trends in U.S. MD-PhD Program Matriculant Diversity by Sex and Race/Ethnicity.

PURPOSE: To examine demographic characteristics of matriculants to U.S. MD-PhD programs by sex and race/ethnicity from academic years (AYs) 2009-2018 and explore the relationships between trends in the percentage of female and underrepresented minority (URM) matriculants to programs with and without Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) funding. METHOD: Linear regression and time trend analysis of the absolute percentage of matriculants into all U.S. MD-PhD programs was performed for self-reported sex and race/ethnicity, using Association of American Medical Colleges data for AYs 2009-2018, including an interaction for MSTP funding status (yes/no) and year. Linear regression of the percentage of programs matriculating no female or no URM students between AYs 2009 and 2018 was performed, focusing on programs in the top 3 quartiles by size (i.e., those matriculating 4 or more students per year). RESULTS: Between AYs 2009 and 2018, the percentage of matriculants to all MD-PhD programs who were female (38.0%-46.0%, 1.05%/year, P = .002) or URM (9.8%-16.7%, 0.77%/year, P < .001) increased. The annual percentage gains of URM matriculants were greater at MSTP-funded programs compared with non-MSTP-funded programs (0.50%/year, P = .046). Moreover, among MD-PhD programs in the top 3 quartiles by size, the percentage of programs with no female matriculants decreased by 0.40% per year ( P = .02) from 4.6% in 2009 to 1.6% in 2018, and the percentage of programs with no URM matriculants decreased by 3.41% per year ( P < .001) from 49% in 2009 to 22% in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent and sustained increase in the percentage of female and URM matriculants to MD-PhD programs from AYs 2009-2018 was observed, but the annual increases in the percentages across groups were small, and the demographics of the MD-PhD workforce still do not reflect the diversity of the U.S. general population.

The Association of Microaggressions with Depressive Symptoms and Institutional Satisfaction Among a National Cohort of Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial research on medical student mistreatment, there is scant quantitative data on microaggressions in US medical education. OBJECTIVE: To assess US medical students' experiences of microaggressions and how these experiences influenced students' mental health and medical school satisfaction. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of US medical students' experiences of microaggressions. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a positive depression screen on the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Medical school satisfaction was a secondary outcome. We used logistic regression to model the association between respondents' reported microaggression frequency and the likelihood of a positive PHQ-2 screen. For secondary outcomes, we used the chi-squared statistic to test associations between microaggression exposure and medical school satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: Out of 759 respondents, 61% experienced at least one microaggression weekly. Gender (64.4%), race/ethnicity (60.5%), and age (40.9%) were the most commonly cited reasons for experiencing microaggressions. Increased microaggression frequency was associated with a positive depression screen in a dose-response relationship, with second, third, and fourth (highest) quartiles of microaggression frequency having odds ratios of 2.71 (95% CI: 1-7.9), 3.87 (95% CI: 1.48-11.05), and 9.38 (95% CI: 3.71-26.69), relative to the first quartile. Medical students who experienced at least one microaggression weekly were more likely to consider medical school transfer (14.5% vs 4.7%, p<0.001) and withdrawal (18.2% vs 5.7%, p<0.001) and more likely to believe microaggressions were a normal part of medical school culture (62.3% vs 32.1%) compared to students who experienced microaggressions less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest study on the experiences and influences of microaggressions among a national sample of US medical students. Our major findings were that microaggressions are frequent occurrences and that the experience of microaggressions was associated with a positive depression screening and decreased medical school satisfaction.

Perspectives of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Diversity Standards.

BACKGROUND: To increase diversity and inclusion in graduate medical education, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) issued a revision to their Common Program Requirements during the 2019-2020 academic year mandating that all residency programs must have policies and practices to achieve appropriate diversity among trainees and faculty. OBJECTIVE: To explore the perspectives of internal medicine program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) on the ACGME diversity standard. DESIGN: Qualitative study of internal medicine residency program leadership from academic and community programs across the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Current PDs (n = 12) and APDs (n = 8) of accredited US internal medicine residency programs. APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews. Data was analyzed using the constant comparative method to extract recurrent themes. KEY RESULTS: Three main themes, described by participants, were identified: (1) internal medicine PDs and APDs had limited knowledge of the new Common Program Requirement relating to diversity; (2) program leaders expressed concern that the diversity standard reaches beyond the PDs' scope of influence and lack of institutional commitment to the successful implementation of diversity standards; (3) participants described narrow view of diversity and inclusion efforts focusing on recruitment strategies during the interview season. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings of lack of familiarity with the new diversity standards, and limited institutional investment in diversity and inclusion efforts raise a concern about successful implementation across GME programs. Nevertheless, our finding suggests that structured implementation in the form of education, guideposts, and financial allocation can alleviate some of the concerns of program leadership in meeting the new ACGME diversity standard in a meaningful way.

Medical Students' Demographic Characteristics and Their Perceptions of Faculty Role Modeling of Respect for Diversity.

Importance: Faculty role modeling is critical to medical students' professional development to provide culturally adept, patient-centered care. However, little is known about students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity. Objective: To examine whether variation exists in medical students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity by student demographic characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' 2016 and 2017 Medical School Graduation Questionnaire, which was administered to graduating students at 140 accredited allopathic US medical schools. Data were analyzed from January 1 to November 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Students' perceptions of faculty role modeling of respect for diversity by the independent variables sex, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and age. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the extent to which student-reported perceptions of faculty respect for diversity varied by demographic characteristics, and logistic regression models were sequentially adjusted first for demographic characteristics and then for marital status and financial variables. Results: Of 30 651 students who completed the survey, the final study sample consisted of 28 778 respondents, representing 75.4% of the 38 160 total US medical school graduates in 2016 and 2017. Of the respondents, 14 804 (51.4%) were male participants and 1506 (5.2%) identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB); a total of 11 926 respondents (41.4%) were 26 years or younger. A total of 17 159 respondents (59.6%) identified as White, 5958 (20.7%) as Asian, 1469 (5.1%) as Black/African American, 2431 (8.4%) as Hispanic/Latinx, and 87 (0.3%) as American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander individuals. Overall, 5101 students (17.7%) reported perceiving that faculty showed a lack of respect for diversity. Of those who identified as Black/African American students, 540 (36.8%) reported perceiving a lack of faculty respect for diversity compared with 2468 White students (14.4%), with an OR of perceived lack of respect of 3.24 (95% CI, 2.86-3.66) after adjusting for other demographic characteristics and covariates. American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.03-2.92), Asian (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.49-1.75), or Hispanic/Latinx (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26-1.75) students also had greater odds of perceiving a lack of faculty respect for diversity compared with White students. Female students had greater odds compared with male students (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.25), and students who identified as LGB (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.74-2.22) or unknown sexual orientation (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.29-2.47) had greater odds compared with heterosexual students. Students aged 33 years or older had greater odds of reporting a perceived lack of respect compared with students aged 26 years or younger (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.58-2.08). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, female students, students belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups, and LGB students disproportionately reported perceiving a lack of respect for diversity among faculty, which has important implications for patient care, the learning environment, and the well-being of medical trainees.

Association Between Sexual Orientation, Mistreatment, and Burnout Among US Medical Students.

Importance: Medical trainee burnout is associated with poor quality care and attrition. Medical students in sexual minority groups report fear of discrimination and increased mistreatment, but the association between sexual orientation, burnout, and mistreatment is unknown. Objective: To evaluate whether medical student burnout differs by sexual orientation and whether this association is mediated by experiences of mistreatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study surveyed US medical students graduating from Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)-accredited US allopathic medical schools who responded to the AAMC graduation questionnaire in 2016 and 2017. Statistical analyses were performed from March 15, 2019, to July 2, 2020, and from November 20 to December 9, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Burnout was measured using the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory for Medical Students, and sexual orientation was categorized as either heterosexual or lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB). Logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate the association between sexual orientation and experiencing burnout (defined as being in the top quartile of exhaustion and disengagement burnout dimensions) and to test the mediating association of mistreatment. Results: From 2016 to 2017, 30 651 students completed the AAMC Graduation Questionnaire, and 26 123 responses were analyzed. Most respondents were younger than 30 years (82.9%) and White (60.3%). A total of 13 470 respondents (51.6%) were male, and 5.4% identified as LGB. Compared with heterosexual students, a greater proportion of LGB students reported experiencing mistreatment in all categories, including humiliation (27.0% LGB students vs 20.7% heterosexual students; P < .001), mistreatment not specific to identity (17.0% vs 10.3%; P < .001), and mistreatment specific to gender (27.3% vs 17.9%; P < .001), race/ethnicity (11.9% vs 8.6%; P < .001), and sexual orientation (23.3% vs 1.0%; P < .001). Being LGB was associated with increased odds of burnout (adjusted odds ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.41-1.89]); this association persisted but was attenuated after adjusting for mistreatment (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.16-1.60]). The odds of burnout increased in a dose-response manner with mistreatment intensity. Lesbian, gay, or bisexual students reporting higher mistreatment specific to sexual orientation had and 8-fold higher predicted probability of burnout compared with heterosexual students (19.8% [95% CI, 8.3%-31.4%] vs 2.3% [95% CI, 0.2%-4.5%]; P < .001). Mediation analysis showed that mistreatment accounts for 31% of the total association of LGB sexual orientation with overall burnout (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that LGB medical students are more likely than their heterosexual peers to experience burnout, an association that is partly mediated by mistreatment. Further work is needed to ensure that medical schools offer safe and inclusive learning environments for LGB medical students.

Assessment of the Prevalence of Medical Student Mistreatment by Sex, Race/Ethnicity, and Sexual Orientation.

Importance: Previous studies have shown that medical student mistreatment is common. However, few data exist to date describing how the prevalence of medical student mistreatment varies by student sex, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Objective: To examine the association between mistreatment and medical student sex, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from the 2016 and 2017 Association of American Medical Colleges Graduation Questionnaire. The questionnaire annually surveys graduating students at all 140 accredited allopathic US medical schools. Participants were graduates from allopathic US medical schools in 2016 and 2017. Data were analyzed between April 1 and December 31, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence of self-reported medical student mistreatment by sex, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Results: A total of 27 504 unique student surveys were analyzed, representing 72.1% of graduating US medical students in 2016 and 2017. The sample included the following: 13 351 female respondents (48.5%), 16 521 white (60.1%), 5641 Asian (20.5%), 2433 underrepresented minority (URM) (8.8%), and 2376 multiracial respondents (8.6%); and 25 763 heterosexual (93.7%) and 1463 lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) respondents (5.3%). At least 1 episode of mistreatment was reported by a greater proportion of female students compared with male students (40.9% vs 25.2%, P < .001); Asian, URM, and multiracial students compared with white students (31.9%, 38.0%, 32.9%, and 24.0%, respectively; P < .001); and LGB students compared with heterosexual students (43.5% vs 23.6%, P < .001). A higher percentage of female students compared with male students reported discrimination based on gender (28.2% vs 9.4%, P < .001); a greater proportion of Asian, URM, and multiracial students compared with white students reported discrimination based on race/ethnicity (15.7%, 23.3%, 11.8%, and 3.8%, respectively; P < .001), and LGB students reported a higher prevalence of discrimination based on sexual orientation than heterosexual students (23.1% vs 1.0%, P < .001). Moreover, higher proportions of female (17.8% vs 7.0%), URM, Asian, and multiracial (4.9% white, 10.7% Asian, 16.3% URM, and 11.3% multiracial), and LGB (16.4% vs 3.6%) students reported 2 or more types of mistreatment compared with their male, white, and heterosexual counterparts (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Female, URM, Asian, multiracial, and LGB students seem to bear a disproportionate burden of the mistreatment reported in medical schools. It appears that addressing the disparate mistreatment reported will be an important step to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in medical education.

Chair Versus Chairman: Does Orthopaedics Use the Gendered Term More Than Other Specialties?

BACKGROUND: Orthopaedics is the least gender-diverse medical specialty. Research suggests that the use of gendered language can contribute to workforce disparity and that gender-neutral language supports the inclusion and advancement of women, but the degree to which gender-neutral language is used by academic departments in what typically is a department's highest position (department chair) has not been characterized. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is the proportion of department websites that use the term chairman (as opposed to chair) greater in orthopaedics than in five other surgical and medical specialties? (2) Are departments led by chairs who are women less likely to use "chairman" than those led by men, and does this vary by specialty? METHODS: Seven hundred fourteen official websites of orthopaedic, neurosurgery, general surgery, internal medicine, pediatrics, and obstetrics and gynecology departments affiliated with 129 allopathic medical schools were screened. Any use of the term chairman on title pages, welcome messages, and faculty profile pages was identified using a Boyer-Moore string-search algorithm and terms were classified based on their location on the site. The overall use of the term chairman was compared by specialty and gender of the chair. RESULTS: Sixty percent of orthopaedic department websites (71 of 119) used the term chairman at least once, a proportion higher than that of pediatrics (36% [46 of 128]; OR 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.63; p < 0.001), internal medicine (31% [38 of 122]; OR 0.030; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.53; p < 0.001), and obstetrics and gynecology (29% [37 of 126]; OR 0.28; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.48; p < 0.001), but no different than that of neurosurgery (57% [54 of 94]; OR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.6; p = 0.74) and general surgery (55% [69 of 125]; OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.4; p = 0.48). Across disciplines, departments whose chairs were women were much less likely to use the term chairman than departments whose chairs were men (14% [17 of 122] versus 50% [297 of 592]; OR 0.16; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.28; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The frequent use of the term chairman in orthopaedics, coupled with the preference of women to use the term chair, suggests considerable room for growth in the use of gender-equal language in orthopaedics. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our current efforts to increase the number of women in orthopaedics may be undermined by gendered language, which can create and reinforce gendered culture in the field. Electing to use gender-neutral leadership titles, while a relatively small step in the pursuit of a more gender-equal environment, presents an immediate and no-cost way to support a more inclusive culture and counteract unconscious gender bias. Future studies should explore the individual attitudes of chairs regarding the use of gendered titles and identify additional ways in which biases may manifest; for example, the use of gendered language in interpersonal communications and the presence of unconscious bias in leadership evaluations. Continued efforts to understand implicit bias in orthopaedics can guide actionable strategies for counteracting gendered stereotypes of the specialty, in turn aiding initiatives to recruit and promote women in the field.

Seeking Inclusion Excellence: Understanding Racial Microaggressions as Experienced by Underrepresented Medical and Nursing Students.

PURPOSE: To describe how racial microaggressions may affect optimal learning for under-represented health professions students. METHOD: The authors conducted focus groups and individual interviews from November 2017 to June 2018 with 37 students at University of California, Davis and Yale University who self-identified as underrepresented in medicine or nursing. Questions explored incidence, response to, and effects of racial microaggressions, as well as students' suggestions for change. Data were organized and coded, then thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes. RESULTS: The data showed consistent examples of microaggressions across both health professions and schools, with peers, faculty, preceptors, and structural elements of the curricula all contributing to microaggressive behavior. The 3 major themes were: students felt devalued by microaggressions; students identified how microaggressions affected their learning, academic performance, and personal wellness; and students had suggestions for promoting inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicated that students perceived that their daily experiences were affected by racial microaggressions. Participants reported strong emotions while experiencing racial microaggressions including feeling stressed, frustrated, and angered by these interactions. Further, students believed microaggressions negatively affected their learning, academic performance, and overall well-being. This study shows the need for leadership and faculty of health professions schools to implement policies, practices, and instructional strategies that support and leverage diversity so that innovative problem-solving can emerge to better serve underserved communities and reduce health disparities.

Minority Resident Physicians' Views on the Role of Race/Ethnicity in Their Training Experiences in the Workplace.

Importance: Black, Hispanic, and Native American physicians remain underrepresented in medicine despite national efforts to increase diversity in the health care workforce. Understanding the unique workplace experiences of minority physicians is essential to inform strategies to create a diverse and inclusive workforce. While prior research has explored the influence of race/ethnicity on the experiences of minority faculty and medical students, there is a paucity of literature investigating how race/ethnicity affects the training experiences of resident physicians in graduate medical education. Objective: To characterize how black, Hispanic, and Native American resident physicians experience race/ethnicity in the workplace. Design, Setting, and Participants: Semistructured, in-depth qualitative interviews of black, Hispanic, and Native American residents were performed in this qualitative study. Interviews took place at the 2017 Annual Medical Education Conference (April 12-17, 2017, in Atlanta, Georgia), sponsored by the Student National Medical Association. Interviews were conducted with 27 residents from 21 residency programs representing a diverse range of medical specialties and geographic locations. Main Outcomes and Measures: The workplace experiences of black, Hispanic, and Native American resident physicians in graduate medical education. Results: Among 27 participants, races/ethnicities were 19 (70%) black, 3 (11%) Hispanic, 1 (4%) Native American, and 4 (15%) mixed race/ethnicity; 15 (56%) were female. Participants described the following 3 major themes in their training experiences in the workplace: a daily barrage of microaggressions and bias, minority residents tasked as race/ethnicity ambassadors, and challenges negotiating professional and personal identity while seen as "other." Conclusions and Relevance: Graduate medical education is an emotionally and physically demanding period for all physicians. Black, Hispanic, and Native American residents experience additional burdens secondary to race/ethnicity. Addressing these unique challenges related to race/ethnicity is crucial to creating a diverse and inclusive work environment.

Introducing sexual orientation and gender identity into the electronic health record: one academic health center's experience.

Many U.S. populations experience significant health disparities. Increasing health care providers' awareness of and education about sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) diversity could help reduce health disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients. The authors share the University of California, Davis, Health System's (UCDHS's) experience as it became the first U.S. academic health center to formally introduce patient SO/GI demographic data into its electronic health record (EHR) as a step toward reducing LGBT health disparities. Adding these data to the EHR initially met with resistance. The authors, members of the UCDHS Task Force for Inclusion of SO/GI in the EHR, viewed this resistance as an invitation to educate leaders, providers, and staff about LGBT health disparities and to expose providers to techniques for discussing SO/GI with patients. They describe the strategies they employed to effect institutional culture change, including involvement of senior leadership, key informant interviews, educational outreach via grand rounds and resident workshops, and creation of a patient safety net through inviting providers to self-identify as welcoming LGBT patients. The ongoing cultural change process has inspired spin-off projects contributing to an improved climate for LGBT individuals at UCDHS, including an employee organization supporting SO/GI diversity, support for and among LGBT medical learners through events and listservs, development and implementation of an LGBT health curriculum, and creation of peer navigator programs for LGBT patients with cancer. The authors reflect on lessons learned and on institutional pride in and commitment to providing quality care for LGBT patients.

Deafness among physicians and trainees: a national survey.

PURPOSE: To describe the characteristics of and accommodations used by the deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHoH) physician and trainee population and examine whether these individuals are more likely to care for DHoH patients. METHOD: Multipronged snowball sampling identified 86 potential DHoH physician and trainee participants. In July to September 2010, a Web-based survey investigated accommodations used by survey respondents. The authors analyzed participants' demographics, accommodation and career satisfaction, sense of institutional support, likelihood of recommending medicine as a career, and current/anticipated DHoH patient population size. RESULTS: The response rate was 65% (56 respondents; 31 trainees and 25 practicing physicians). Modified stethoscopes were the most frequently used accommodation (n = 50; 89%); other accommodations included auditory equipment, note-taking, computer-assisted real-time captioning, signed interpretation, and oral interpretation. Most respondents reported that their accommodations met their needs well, although 2 spent up to 10 hours weekly arranging accommodations. Of 25 physicians, 17 reported primary care specialties; 7 of 31 trainees planned to enter primary care specialties. Over 20% of trainees anticipated working with DHoH patients, whereas physicians on average spent 10% of their time with DHoH patients. Physicians' accommodation satisfaction was positively associated with career satisfaction and recommending medicine as a career. CONCLUSIONS: DHoH physicians and trainees seemed satisfied with frequent, multimodal accommodations from employers and educators. These results may assist organizations in planning accommodation provisions. Because DHoH physicians and trainees seem interested in primary care and serving DHoH patients, recruiting and training DHoH physicians has implications for the care of this underserved population.