Structural Racism in Behavioral Health Presentation and Management.

Nia is a first-grade student with a history of trauma who was brought in by ambulance to the pediatric emergency department for "out of control behavior" at school. This is the first of multiple presentations to the emergency department for psychiatric evaluation, stabilization, and management throughout her elementary and middle school years. Several of the visits resulted in admission to the inpatient pediatric service, where she "boarded" while awaiting transfer to an inpatient psychiatric facility. At times, clinical teams used involuntary emergency medications and physical restraints, as well as hospital security presence at the bedside, to control Nia's behavior. Nia is Black and her story is a case study of how structural racism manifests for an individual child. Her story highlights the impact of adultification bias and the propensity to mislabel Black youth with diagnoses characterized by fixed patterns of negative behaviors, as opposed to recognizing normative reactions to trauma or other adverse childhood experiences-in Nia's case, poverty, domestic violence, and Child Protective Services involvement. In telling Nia's story, we (1) define racism and discuss the interplay of structural, institutional, and interpersonal racism in the health care, education, and judicial systems; (2) highlight the impact of adultification bias on Black youth; (3) delineate racial disparities in behavioral health diagnosis and management, school discipline and exclusion, and health care's contributions to the school-to-prison pipeline; and finally (4) propose action steps to mitigate the impact of racism on pediatric mental health and health care.

Health Equity Rounds: An Interdisciplinary Case Conference to Address Implicit Bias and Structural Racism for Faculty and Trainees.

Introduction: The medical community recognizes the importance of confronting structural racism and implicit bias to address health inequities. Several curricula aimed at teaching trainees about these issues are described in the literature. However, few curricula exist that engage faculty members as learners rather than teachers of these topics or target interdisciplinary audiences. Methods: We developed a longitudinal case conference curriculum called Health Equity Rounds (HER) to discuss and address the impact of structural racism and implicit bias on patient care. The curriculum engaged participants across training levels and disciplines on these topics utilizing case-based discussion, evidence-based exercises, and two relevant conceptual frameworks. It was delivered quarterly as part of a departmental case conference series. We evaluated HER's feasibility and acceptability by tracking conference attendance and administering postconference surveys. We analyzed quantitative survey data using descriptive statistics and qualitatively reviewed free-text comments. Results: We delivered seven 1-hour HER conferences at our institution from June 2016 to June 2018. A mean of 66 participants attended each HER. Most survey respondents (88% or more) indicated that HER promoted personal reflection on implicit bias, and 75% or more indicated that HER would impact their clinical practice. Discussion: HER provided a unique forum for practitioners across training levels to address structural racism and implicit bias. Our aim in dissemination is to provide meaningful tools for others to adapt at their own institutions, recognizing that HER should serve as a component of larger, multifaceted efforts to decrease structural racism and implicit bias in health care.

A data-rich recruitment core to support translational clinical research.

BACKGROUND: Underenrollment of clinical studies wastes resources and delays assessment of research discoveries. We describe the organization and impact of a centralized recruitment core delivering comprehensive recruitment support to investigators. METHODS: The Rockefeller University Center for Clinical and Translational Science supports a centralized recruitment core, call center, Research Volunteer Repository, data infrastructure, and staff who provide expert recruitment services to investigators. During protocol development, consultations aim to optimize enrollment feasibility, develop recruitment strategy, budget, and advertising. Services during study conduct include advertising placement, repository queries, call management, prescreening, referral, and visit scheduling. Utilization and recruitment outcomes are tracked using dedicated software. RESULTS: For protocols receiving recruitment services during 2009-2013: median time from initiation of recruitment to the first enrolled participant was 10 days; of 4,047 first-time callers to the call center, 92% (n = 3,722) enrolled in the Research Volunteer Repository, with 99% retention; 23% of Repository enrollees subsequently enrolled in ≥1 research studies, with 89% retention. Of volunteers referred by repository queries, 49% (280/537) enrolled into the study, with 92% retained. CONCLUSIONS: Provision of robust recruitment infrastructure including expertise, a volunteer repository, data capture and real-time analysis accelerates protocol accrual. Application of recruitment science improves the quality of clinical investigation.

The Rockefeller University Navigation Program: a structured multidisciplinary protocol development and educational program to advance translational research.

The development of translational clinical research protocols is complex. To assist investigators, we developed a structured supportive guidance process (Navigation) to expedite protocol development to the standards of good clinical practice (GCP), focusing on research ethics and integrity. Navigation consists of experienced research coordinators leading investigators through a concerted multistep protocol development process from concept initiation to submission of the final protocol. To assess the effectiveness of Navigation, we collect data on the experience of investigators, the intensity of support required for protocol development, IRB review outcomes, and protocol start and completion dates. One hundred forty-four protocols underwent Navigation and achieved IRB approval since the program began in 2007, including 37 led by trainee investigators, 26 led by MDs, 9 by MD/PhDs, 57 by PhDs, and 12 by investigators with other credentials (e.g., RN, MPH). In every year, more than 50% of Navigated protocols were approved by the IRB within 30 days. For trainees who had more than one protocol navigated, the intensity of Navigation support required decreased over time. Navigation can increase access to translational studies for basic scientists, facilitate GCP training for investigators, and accelerate development and approval of protocols of high ethical and scientific quality.