Dataset Information

Perspectives on Anti-Black Racism and Mitigation Strategies Among Faculty Experts at Academic Medical Centers.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Black faculty and trainees remain underrepresented in academic medicine because of systemic racism. Years of diversity and inclusion efforts have not succeeded in eliminating the unique challenges faced by Black faculty in academic medicine.

Objectives

To elicit expert faculty perspectives on anti-Black racism in academic medicine based on lived and/or professional experience and to solicit recommendations for an intervention for faculty to dismantle anti-Black racism within academic medical centers.

Design, setting, and participants

This qualitative study included semistructured interviews with experts in understanding and dismantling anti-Black racism within academic medical centers. Participants had expertise in anti-Black racism through their lived experience as a Black faculty member and/or professional experience in diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. Participants were recruited from academic medical centers from around the United States. Interviews were conducted through an online meeting platform, audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subsequently coded following an inductive qualitative description approach. Interviews were completed between October 2020 and March 2021.

Main outcomes and measures

Outcomes include the experiences of Black faculty and trainees in academic medicine and recommendations for developing an intervention to dismantle anti-Black racism within academic medicine.

Results

A total of 16 participants completed this study; most identified as Black or African American (9 [56%]) and female (10 [63%]). Results were sorted into 2 content domains, with several themes within those domains: (1) barriers faced by Black faculty and trainees and potential solutions and (2) recommendations for an intervention directed at faculty to dismantle anti-Black racism in academic medicine. Barriers faced by Black faculty and trainees included lack of representation; challenges with the recruitment, retention, and promotion of Black faculty; and experiences of microaggressions and overt racism. Participants suggested that an intervention should have a comprehensive learning objective; be mandatory for all faculty, with the exception of Black faculty; draw from outside expertise; and receive allocation of resources and funding equal to other important training modules.

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this study affirm prior work about the unique challenges faced by Black faculty and trainees in academic medicine because of interpersonal and institutional racism and build on this prior work by soliciting recommendations to guide intervention development. An intervention to dismantle anti-Black racism within academic medicine is urgently needed and will require leadership buy-in and financial commitments from institutions for effective development and implementation.

SUBMITTER: Konuthula D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9034397 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perspectives on Anti-Black Racism and Mitigation Strategies Among Faculty Experts at Academic Medical Centers.

Konuthula Dedeepya D de Abril Cameron Flor F Jonassaint Naudia N Ufomata Eloho E Torres Orquidia O Essien Utibe R UR Hamm Megan E ME Merlin Jessica J Ragavan Maya I MI

JAMA network open 20220401 4

<h4>Importance</h4>Black faculty and trainees remain underrepresented in academic medicine because of systemic racism. Years of diversity and inclusion efforts have not succeeded in eliminating the unique challenges faced by Black faculty in academic medicine.<h4>Objectives</h4>To elicit expert faculty perspectives on anti-Black racism in academic medicine based on lived and/or professional experience and to solicit recommendations for an intervention for faculty to dismantle anti-Black racism w ...[more]

PMID: 35452105

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceUncertainty remains among clinicians regarding processes to address and resolve conflict around anti-Black racism.ObjectiveTo elicit clinicians' perceptions of their role in addressing concerns about anti-Black racism among Black patients with serious illness as well as their families.Design, setting, and participantsIn this qualitative study, one-on-one semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 physicians at an academic county hospital between August 1 and October 31, 2022. Participants were provided clinical scenarios where anti-Black racism was a concern of a patient with serious illness. Participants were asked open-ended questions about initial impressions, prior similar experiences, potential strategies to address patients' concerns, and additional resources to support these conversations. A framework based on restorative justice was used to guide qualitative analyses.Main outcomes and measuresPerspectives on addressing anti-Black racism as described by physicians.ResultsA total of 21 medical subspecialists (mean [SD] age, 44.2 [7.8] years) participated in the study. Most physicians were women (14 [66.7%]), 4 were Asian (19.0%), 3 were Black (14.3%), and 14 were White (66.7%). Participants identified practices that are normalized in clinical settings that may perpetuate and exacerbate perceptions of anti-Black racism. Using provided scenarios and personal experiences, participants were able to describe how Black patients are harmed as a result of these practices. Last, participants identified strategies and resources for addressing Black patients' concerns and facilitating conflict resolution, but they stopped short of promoting personal or team accountability for anti-Black racism.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, physicians identified resources, skills, and processes that partially aligned with a restorative justice framework to address anti-Black racism and facilitate conflict resolution, but did not provide steps for actualizing accountability. Restorative justice and similar processes may provide space within a mediated setting for clinicians to repair harm, provide accountability, and facilitate racial healing.

Project description:Background Throughout graduate and postgraduate education, trainees need to gauge the impact of training location on future institutions of practice. Objective We assessed rates of internal hiring of ophthalmology faculty at academic institutions from their same institution of training. Methods This was a cross-sectional study. We included 1,246 clinical ophthalmology faculty at the 13 top-ranked institutions listed in the 2021 U.S. News and World Report. Primary, emeritus, adjunct, and affiliate faculty were included. Publicly available information was collected from institutional websites and other online sources. Statistical analyses were conducted using t -tests or Mann-Whitney tests, chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests, and multivariate logistic regression. The main outcome measured was internal hires, defined as faculty who had completed residency and/or fellowship training at their current institution. Results In total, 47.3% of faculty were internal hires who completed residency or fellowship at the same institution. Among externally trained faculty, 27.7% completed residency and 56.0% completed fellowship at another top 13 programs. Internal hires were more frequently fellowship-trained, had a greater number of publications, and practiced in smaller departments ( p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.002, respectively). A greater proportion of internal hires held leadership positions ( p = 0.012). Faculty practicing in the Midwest or West and with more years since residency graduation were less likely (odds ratio [OR], 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.48; OR, 0.49, 95% CI, 0.31-0.78; OR, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.97-0.99, respectively) to be internal hires. Faculty with non-R01 National Institutes of Health funding were more likely to be internal hires (OR, 1.82, 95% CI: 1.12-2.96). Conclusions Training institution is key to determining the institution of practice. These results may be beneficial for trainees to consider when selecting a training program.

Project description:ImportanceBlack patients with serious illness experience higher-intensity care at the end of life. Little research has used critical, race-conscious approaches to examine factors associated with these outcomes.ObjectiveTo investigate the lived experiences of Black patients with serious illness and how various factors may be associated with patient-clinician communication and medical decision-making.Design, setting, and participantsIn this qualitative study, one-on-one, semistructured interviews were conducted with 25 Black patients with serious illness hospitalized at an urban academic medical center in Washington State between January 2021 and February 2023. Patients were asked to discuss experiences with racism, how those experiences affected the way they communicated with clinicians, and how racism impacted medical decision-making. Public Health Critical Race Praxis was used as framework and process.Main outcomes and measuresThe experience and of racism and its association, as described by Black patients who had serious illness, with patient-clinician communication and medical decision-making within a racialized health care setting.ResultsA total of 25 Black patients (mean [SD] age, 62.0 [10.3] years; 20 males [80.0%]) with serious illness were interviewed. Participants had substantial socioeconomic disadvantage, with low levels of wealth (10 patients with 0 assets [40.0%]), income (annual income <$25 000 among 19 of 24 patients with income data [79.2%]), educational attainment (mean [SD] 13.4 [2.7] years of schooling), and health literacy (mean [SD] score in the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Short Form, 5.8 [2.0]). Participants reported high levels of medical mistrust and high frequency of discrimination and microaggressions experienced in health care settings. Participants reported epistemic injustice as the most common manifestation of racism: silencing of their own knowledge and lived experiences about their bodies and illness by health care workers. Participants reported that these experiences made them feel isolated and devalued, especially if they had intersecting, marginalized identities, such as being underinsured or unhoused. These experiences were associated with exacerbation of existing medical mistrust and poor patient-clinician communication. Participants described various mechanisms of self-advocacy and medical decision-making based on prior experiences with mistreatment from health care workers and medical trauma.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that Black patients' experiences with racism, specifically epistemic injustice, were associated with their perspectives on medical care and decision-making during serious illness and end of life. These findings suggest that race-conscious, intersectional approaches may be needed to improve patient-clinician communication and support Black patients with serious illness to alleviate the distress and trauma of racism as these patients near the end of life.

Project description:BackgroundAcademic Medical Centers (AMCs) must simultaneously serve different purposes: Delivery of high quality healthcare services to patients, as the main mission, supported by other core missions such as academic activities, i.e., researching, teaching and tutoring, while maintaining solvency. This study aims to develop a methodology for constructing models evaluating the academic value provided by AMCs and implementing it at the largest AMC in Israel.MethodsThirty five practiced educators and researchers, academic experts, faculty members and executives, all employed by a metropolitan 1500-bed AMC, were involved in developing academic quality indicators. First, an initial list of AMCs' academic quality indicators was drafted, using a literature review and consulting scholars. Afterwards, additional data and preferences were collected by conducting semi-structured interviews, complemented by a three-round Delphi Panel. Finally, the methodology for constructing a model evaluating the academic value provided by the AMC was developed.ResultsThe composite academic quality indicators methodology consists of nine indicators (relative weight in parentheses): 'Scientific Publications Value' (18.7%), 'Completed Studies' (13.5%), 'Authors Value' (13.0%), 'Residents Quality' (11.3%), 'Competitive Grants Budget' (10.2%), 'Academic Training' (8.7%), 'Academic Positions' (8.3%), 'Number of Studies' (8.3%) and 'Academic Supervision' (8.0%). These indicators were grouped into three core categories: 'Education', 'Research' and 'Publications', having almost the same importance on a scale from zero to one (0-1), i.e., 0.363, 0.320, and 0.317, respectively. The results demonstrated a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach-alpha range: 0.79-0.86).ConclusionsWe have found a gap in the ability to measure academic value provided by AMCs. The main contribution of this research is the development of methodology for constructing evaluation models for AMCs academic performance. Further studies are needed to further test the validity and reliability of the proposed methodology at other sites.

Project description:BackgroundDespite decades of anti-racism and equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) interventions in academic medicine, medical racism continues to harm patients and healthcare providers. We sought to deeply explore experiences and beliefs about medical racism among academic clinicians to understand the drivers of persistent medical racism and to inform intervention design.MethodsWe interviewed academically-affiliated clinicians with any racial identity from the Departments of Family Medicine, Cardiac Sciences, Emergency Medicine, and Medicine to understand their experiences and perceptions of medical racism. We performed thematic content analysis of semi-structured interview data to understand the barriers and facilitators of ongoing medical racism. Based on participant narratives, we developed a logic framework that demonstrates the necessary steps in the process of addressing racism using if/then logic. This framework was then applied to all narratives and the barriers to addressing medical racism were aligned with each step in the logic framework. Proposed interventions, as suggested by participants or study team members and/or identified in the literature, were matched to these identified barriers to addressing racism.ResultsParticipant narratives of their experiences of medical racism demonstrated multiple barriers to addressing racism, such as a perceived lack of empathy from white colleagues. Few potential facilitators to addressing racism were also identified, including shared language to understand racism. The logic framework suggested that addressing racism requires individuals to understand, recognize, name, and confront medical racism.ConclusionsOrganizations can use this logic framework to understand their local context and select targeted anti-racism or EDI interventions. Theory-informed approaches to medical racism may be more effective than interventions that do not address local barriers or facilitators for persistent medical racism.

Dataset Information

Perspectives on Anti-Black Racism and Mitigation Strategies Among Faculty Experts at Academic Medical Centers.

Importance

Objectives

Design, setting, and participants

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Perspectives on Anti-Black Racism and Mitigation Strategies Among Faculty Experts at Academic Medical Centers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets