Development of a Tool to Measure Student Perceptions of Equity and Inclusion in Medical Schools.

Importance: Creating an inclusive and equitable learning environment is a national priority. Nevertheless, data reflecting medical students' perception of the climate of equity and inclusion are limited. Objective: To develop and validate an instrument to measure students' perceptions of the climate of equity and inclusion in medical school using data collected annually by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Design, Setting, and Participants: The Promoting Diversity, Group Inclusion, and Equity tool was developed in 3 stages. A Delphi panel of 9 members identified survey items from preexisting AAMC data sources. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed on student responses to AAMC surveys to construct the tool, which underwent rigorous psychometric validation. Participants were undergraduate medical students at Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited medical schools in the US who completed the 2015 to 2019 AAMC Year 2 Questionnaire (Y2Q), the administrations of 2016 to 2020 AAMC Graduation Questionnaire (GQ), or both. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to November 2023. Exposures: Student race and ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development and psychometric validation of the tool, including construct validity, internal consistency, and criterion validity. Results: Delphi panel members identified 146 survey items from the Y2Q and GQ reflecting students' perception of the climate of equity and inclusion, and responses to these survey items were obtained from 54 906 students for the Y2Q cohort (median [IQR] age, 24 [23-26] years; 29 208 [52.75%] were female, 11 389 [20.57%] were Asian, 4089 [7.39%] were multiracial, and 33 373 [60.28%] were White) and 61 998 for the GQ cohort (median [IQR] age, 27 [26-28] years; 30 793 [49.67%] were female, 13 049 [21.05%] were Asian, 4136 [6.67%] were multiracial, and 38 215 [61.64%] were White). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of student responses identified 8 factors for the Y2Q model (faculty role modeling; student empowerment; student fellowship; cultural humility; faculty support for students; fostering a collaborative and safe environment; discrimination: race, ethnicity, and gender; and discrimination: sexual orientation) and 5 factors for the GQ model (faculty role modeling; student empowerment; faculty support for students; discrimination: race, ethnicity, and gender; and discrimination: sexual orientation). Confirmatory factor analysis indicated acceptable model fit (root mean square error of approximation of 0.05 [Y2Q] and 0.06 [GQ] and comparative fit indices of 0.95 [Y2Q] and 0.94 [GQ]). Cronbach α for individual factors demonstrated internal consistency ranging from 0.69 to 0.92 (Y2Q) and 0.76 to 0.95 (GQ). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the new tool is a reliable and psychometrically valid measure of medical students' perceptions of equity and inclusion in the learning environment.

The Long Shadow: A Historical Perspective on Racism in Medical Education.

To dismantle racism in U.S. medical education, people must understand how the history of Christian Europe, Enlightenment-era racial science, colonization, slavery, and racism shaped modern American medicine. Beginning with the coalescence of Christian European identity and empire, the authors trace European racial reasoning through the racial science of the Enlightenment into the White supremacist and anti-Black ideology behind Europe's global system of racialized colonization and enslavement. The authors then follow this racist ideology as it becomes an organizing principle of Euro-American medicine and examine how it manifests in medical education in the United States today. Within this historical context, the authors expose the histories of violence underlying contemporary terms such as implicit bias and microaggressions. Through this history, they also gain a deeper appreciation of why racism is so prevalent in medical education and how it affects admissions, assessments, faculty and trainee diversity, retention, racial climate, and the physical environment. The authors then recommend 6 historically informed steps for confronting racism in medical education: (1) incorporate the history of racism into medical education and unmask institutional histories of racism, (2) create centralized reporting mechanisms and implement systematic reviews of bias in educational and clinical activities, (3) adopt mastery-based assessment in medical education, (4) embrace holistic review and expand its possibilities in admissions, (5) increase faculty diversity by using holistic review principles in hiring and promotions, and (6) leverage accreditation to combat bias in medical education. These strategies will help academic medicine begin to acknowledge the harms propagated throughout the history of racism in medicine and start taking meaningful steps to address them. Although the authors have focused on racism in this paper, they recognize there are many forms of bias that impact medical education and intersect with racism, each with its particular history, that deserve their own telling and redress.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Internal Medicine Residency Assessments.

Importance: Previous studies have demonstrated racial and ethnic inequities in medical student assessments, awards, and faculty promotions at academic medical centers. Few data exist about similar racial and ethnic disparities at the level of graduate medical education. Objective: To examine the association between race and ethnicity and performance assessments among a national cohort of internal medicine residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated assessments of performance for 9026 internal medicine residents from the graduating classes of 2016 and 2017 at Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited internal medicine residency programs in the US. Analyses were conducted between July 1, 2020, and June 31, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was midyear and year-end total ACGME Milestone scores for underrepresented in medicine (URiM [Hispanic only; non-Hispanic American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander only; or non-Hispanic Black/African American]) and Asian residents compared with White residents as determined by their Clinical Competency Committees and residency program directors. Differences in scores between Asian and URiM residents compared with White residents were also compared for each of the 6 competency domains as supportive outcomes. Results: The study cohort included 9026 residents from 305 internal medicine residency programs. Of these residents, 3994 (44.2%) were female, 3258 (36.1%) were Asian, 1216 (13.5%) were URiM, and 4552 (50.4%) were White. In the fully adjusted model, no difference was found in the initial midyear total Milestone scores between URiM and White residents, but there was a difference between Asian and White residents, which favored White residents (mean [SD] difference in scores for Asian residents: -1.27 [0.38]; P < .001). In the second year of training, White residents received increasingly higher scores relative to URiM and Asian residents. These racial disparities peaked in postgraduate year (PGY) 2 (mean [SD] difference in scores for URiM residents, -2.54 [0.38]; P < .001; mean [SD] difference in scores for Asian residents, -1.9 [0.27]; P < .001). By the final year 3 assessment, the gap between White and Asian and URiM residents' scores narrowed, and no racial or ethnic differences were found. Trends in racial and ethnic differences among the 6 competency domains mirrored total Milestone scores, with differences peaking in PGY2 and then decreasing in PGY3 such that parity in assessment was reached in all competency domains by the end of training. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, URiM and Asian internal medicine residents received lower ratings on performance assessments than their White peers during the first and second years of training, which may reflect racial bias in assessment. This disparity in assessment may limit opportunities for physicians from minoritized racial and ethnic groups and hinder physician workforce diversity.

Revisiting the Exhibits-Medical Student Reflections on Changes to the Institutional Portraiture at a US Medical School.

BACKGROUND: Yale School of Medicine's (YSM) Sterling Hall of Medicine (SHM) has historically been lined with large oil paintings of mostly White men, despite over a century of Black and female enrollment. These spaces can be seen as exclusionary to students underrepresented in medicine, and may result in decreased well-being and adversely affect academic performance. Student-led activism has resulted in recent changes to these walls, including the addition of images of women faculty, and artwork by students, faculty, and staff. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate how recent changes to longstanding historical portraiture in SHM affected students' reflections on being in that space. DESIGN: This was a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews conducted virtually. PARTICIPANTS: Second- to fourth-year YSM medical students were interviewed. APPROACH: Qualitative interviews were used to gauge students' impressions of how they perceived both the original and updated artwork and portraiture, as well as the overall physical environment. KEY RESULTS: Nine interviews were conducted, with interviewees describing the portraiture as reflective of YSM's institutional values. They related this to other aspects of an exclusionary environment, and noted that they created belonging at YSM within smaller communities. Students recognized and expressed appreciation for the changes to the portraiture, particularly the increase in diverse representation, and they noted stark contrasts to the prior space. While they describe positive attitudes regarding changes in SHM's exhibited portraiture and art, they also expressed skepticism about whether these changes were performative or whether they reflected true commitment to reform. CONCLUSIONS: This study depicts how the portraiture and physical environment of a medical school affects medical students, and that interventions to reform institutional portraiture can have considerable impact on students' attitudes regarding their medical school experiences.

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.

Blackface in White Space: Using Admissions to Address Racism in Medical Education.

Given the long history and pervasive nature of racism in medical culture, this essay argues that diversifying efforts alone cannot address systemic racism in medical education. Positive affirmation of anti-racist values and racial consciousness in the admissions process is necessary to create a truly inclusive culture in medical education and begin to undo centuries of racial prejudice in medicine. Drawing from historic examples, scholarship on the sociology of racialized space, recent research on race and medical education, and personal experience, we propose that medical educational institutions make a more concerted effort to consider racial attitudes and awareness as part of the admissions process as well as curricular reform efforts. We also provide examples of potential ways to practically implement this proposal in the admissions process.

Colorblind Algorithms: Racism in the Era of COVID-19.

This commentary offers a critique of the recent policy document issued by White et al. (2020) to guide critical care resource (e.g. ventilators) allocation during public health emergencies such as COVID-19. We argue that, if disseminated widely, this criteria would result in a racially inequitable resource distribution in the current COVID-19 crisis. We link the White et al. (2020) resource distribution protocol to other "colorblind" healthcare algorithms that have relied on seemingly objective but fundamentally biased data, thereby reinforcing and exacerbating pre-existing racial health disparities. We suggest a health equity framework to ensure unbiased distribution of critical care resources during COVID-19 and in general practice.