Opportunities for Mitigating Bias in the Process and Priorities for Pediatric Chief Resident Selection.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current processes and priorities for pediatric chief resident (CR) selection, to characterize pediatric CR demographics in the past 5 years nationally, and to identify opportunities for addressing bias in the process of pediatric CR selection. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional study design with an anonymous national survey of pediatric program directors (PDs) through a web-based platform in January 2020. RESULTS: A total of 92 of 200 (46%) of PDs responded. About 16% of CR are underrepresented in medicine (UIM) by race/ethnicity. The influential factors most commonly cited in selection were nominations from faculty (84%) and peers (77%), followed by fit with other co-chiefs (68%). Only 17% reported having a specific method to mitigate bias in CR selection, most commonly involving multiple stakeholders in the process. CONCLUSIONS: Current CR selection relies on processes with the potential to introduce bias. Programs have opportunities to address bias in the CR selection process by reevaluating methods vulnerable to bias, including peer/faculty nominations, fit with peers, ITE scores, and assessments through the use of more objective selection tools.

A national needs assessment of emergency medicine resident-as-teacher curricula.

Both the Liaison Committee on Medical Education and the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education require residents to be engaged in teaching to develop skills as educators. Although proposed guidelines for an emergency medicine (EM) resident-as-teachers (RAT) curriculum were published in 2006, little has been published regarding RAT curriculum implementation or outcomes since. A crucial first step in developing a formal RAT curriculum for EM educators to pilot, implement, and evaluate is an assessment of current needs and practices related to RAT curricula in EM residencies. The aim of this study was to conduct a needs assessment of EM residency programs regarding RAT curricular resources and practices. We invited all EM residency programs to participate in a web-based survey assessing their current RAT curricula and needs. 28 % responded to our needs assessment. Amongst responding programs, 60 % had a RAT curriculum. Of programs with a required medical student rotation, 59 % had a RAT curriculum. Of programs without a RAT program, 14 % had a program in development, and 18 % had a teaching resident program without a curriculum. Most RAT programs (72 %) were lecture-based and the majority (66 %) evaluated using survey data. 84 % of respondent programs demonstrated a desire for a national RAT curriculum. We find that despite national mandates, a large portion of programs do not have a RAT curriculum in place. There is wide variation in core content and curriculum evaluation techniques among available curricula. A majority of respondents report interest in a standardized web-based curriculum as one potential solution to this problem. Our results may help inform collaborative efforts to develop a national EM RAT curriculum.

Update in medical education for pediatrics: insights and directions from the 2010 literature.

BACKGROUND: While most would agree that utilizing the literature to enhance individual educational practice and/or institutional success is the ideal method for improving medical education, methods to focus attention on the most relevant and valuable information have been heretofore lacking in the pediatric medical education literature. METHODS: We performed a review of the medical education literature for the year 2010. Utilizing a similar strategy employed by others in Internal Medicine, we selected 12 high-yield education journals and manually reviewed the table of contents to select titles that would have grassroots applicability for medical educators. A broad search through PubMed was then completed using search terms adopted from prior studies, and titles from this search were similarly selected. The abstracts of selected titles (n=147) were each reviewed by two of the authors, then all authors reached consensus on articles for full review (n=34). The articles were then discussed and scored to achieve consensus for the 11 articles for inclusion in this paper. RESULTS: Several themes emerged from reviewing these publications. We did not select topics or sections of interest a priori. The themes, grouped into four areas: supervision and leadership, hand-off communication, core competencies: teaching and assessment, and educational potpourri, reflect our community's current concerns, challenges, and engagement in addressing these topics. Each article is summarized below and begins with a brief statement of what the study adds to the practice of pediatric medical education. DISCUSSION: This review highlights multiple 'articles of value' for all medical educators. We believe the value of these articles and the information they contain for improving the methods used to educate medical students, residents, and fellows are significant. The organically derived thematic areas of the representative articles offer a view of the landscape of medical education research in pediatrics in 2010. Readers can use these individual articles as both tools to improve their practice, as well as inspiration for future areas of research.