Underrepresented In Medicine Research Articles

Factors Influencing Medical Students' Pursuit of Urology: Results From the AUA Census (2019-2021).

Growing interest in urology among medical students highlights the need to understand factors influencing their specialty choice in today's context. We also investigate COVID-19's impact on these factors and any disparities among female and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) students. From 2019 to 2021, the AUA Annual Census survey included medical student-focused questions on demographics, career interests, and decision factors. Responses were analyzed. One hundred ninety-two medical students participated. Thirty-six (24%) identified as female and 19 (13%) as URiM. Common reasons students would choose urology included surgical procedures (93%) and "good lifestyle" among surgical careers (85%), with no differences across gender or URiM status. Compared to pre-COVID (2019), during COVID (2020-2021), a greater proportion of students cited cutting-edge technology (90.1% vs 73.1%, P = .008) and surgical procedures (98.6% vs 87.2%, P = .008) as reasons to choose urology. Reasons for not choosing urology included competitiveness (48%) and poor lifestyle (26%). Female and URiM students expressed concern related to the combined "male dominated/gender discrimination/lack of diversity" aspect (female 33% vs male 3%, P < .001; URiM 25% vs non-URiM 7%, P = .04). The AUA Census survey highlights factors influencing medical students' decisions regarding urology. Interest in procedural and technological aspects grew during COVID. Students expressed concern over the field's competitiveness and poor lifestyle, while also acknowledging that urology offers a favorable lifestyle compared to other surgical careers. Female and URiM students expressed ongoing concerns over the combined aspect of gender discrimination and/or the lack of existing diversity in the field.

Limitations in Faculty Advancement for Underrepresented Groups in Academic Otolaryngology.

Despite the increasing racial diversity of the United States, representation in academic medicine faculty does not reach concordance with the general population and worsens with higher rank. Few studies have examined this within academic Otolaryngology and surgical subspecialties. This project aims to compare rank equity in academic Otolaryngology on self-reported gender and race/ethnicity between the years 2000 and 2020. Publicly available data were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges under the "Data & Reports" section for the years 2000 and 2020. The report comprised of full-time faculty from all U.S. medical schools. To determine parity between faculty ranks across gender and race/ethnicity, rank equity index (REI) was calculated for associate/assistant, professor/associate, and professor/assistant professor comparisons. The percentage of women faculty in Otolaryngology has increased from 21% in 2000 to 37% in 2020; however, they did not achieve parity at all rank comparisons for both years. On the contrary, men were above parity at all rank comparisons. Improvements in rank equity occurred for Black/African American (Black) and Hispanic Latino/Spanish Origin (Latine) faculty between the years 2000 and 2020; however, when accounting for gender, benefits were concentrated among men. Advancement along the academic ladder is limited for women of all racial groups in academic Otolaryngology. While improved rank equity was seen for Black and Latine faculty, these improvements were largely among men. Future directions should aim to identify barriers to recruitment, retention, and promotion for women and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) academic otolaryngologists and create interventions that diversify Otolaryngology faculty at all ranks. NA Laryngoscope, 134:1625-1632, 2024.

Ophthalmology Faculty Diversity Trends in the US

Enhancing the diversity of ophthalmologists can potentially contribute to diminishing disparities in eye care. To investigate longitudinal trends in the representation of individuals underrepresented in medicine (URiM) and women among ophthalmology faculty compared with other specialties and to assess disparities between ophthalmology faculty demographic characteristics and the US population. In this cross-sectional study, a comprehensive analysis of Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster data between 2000 and 2021 was conducted, using data from the US Medical School Faculty report on 56 438 ophthalmology faculty members. The data set was used to differentiate ophthalmology faculty members by gender, rank, and designation as a URiM individual. Outcome measures included changes in URiM and non-URiM faculty proportions, faculty rank, gender, department chair positions, and the US population between 2000 and 2021. A total of 56 438 ophthalmology faculty members (37 511 men [66.5%]) were included in the study. The number of ophthalmology faculty increased from 1820 in 2000 to 3151 in 2021. Across all years, URiM female faculty represented 3.1% of ophthalmologists (1733 of 56 438), while URiM men accounted for 3.5% (1983 of 56 438). Overall, non-URiM men constituted 63.0% of ophthalmologists (35 528 of 56 438), and non-URiM women accounted for 30.5% (17 194 of 56 438). The proportion of URiM male faculty remained stable from 2000 to 2021 (63 of 1820 [3.5%] vs 104 of 3151 [3.3%]), with a small increase in URiM women faculty at junior faculty positions (2000, 40 of 1820 [2.2%]; 2021, 129 of 3151 [4.1%]; difference, 1.9% [95% CI, 0.9%-2.9%]). Proportions of non-URiM men decreased from 71.2% (1295 of 1820) in 2000 to 55.3% (1743 of 3151) in 2021 (difference, 15.8% [95% CI, 13.1%-18.6%]) and proportions of non-URiM women increased from 23.2% (422 of 1820) in 2000 to 37.3% (1175 of 3151) in 2021 (difference, 14.1% [95% CI, 11.5%-16.7%]). In terms of faculty rank, there were increases in representation of women from 2000 to 2021 at assistant professor (from 11.2% [203 of 1819] to 19.7% [622 of 3165]; difference, 8.5% [95% CI, 6.5%-10.5%]), associate professor (from 4.6% [83 of 1819] to 8.6% [271 of 3165]; difference, 4.0% [95% CI, 2.6%-5.4%]), and professor levels (from 2.8% [51 of 1819] to 7.1% [223 of 3165]; difference, 4.3% [95% CI, 3.9%-6.1%]). URiM representation remained stable at most ranks. Compared with other specialties, ophthalmology had among the lowest percentage change in URiM faculty. The expansion of ophthalmology's URiM faculty representation was less than one-third that of the diverse US population. These findings highlight substantial growth in ophthalmology faculty and an increase in women's representation across several faculty ranks. However, URiM representation has remained largely unchanged, despite an increase at the associate professor level. This finding emphasizes the need for continued efforts to enhance diversity in academic ophthalmology.

Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Diversity Among Academic Surgical Leaders in the US

Surgical department chairs remain conspicuously nondiverse despite the recognized importance of diverse physician workforces. However, the extent of diversity among non-chair leadership remains underexplored. To evaluate racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of surgical department chairs, vice chairs (VCs), and division chiefs (DCs) in the US. For this cross-sectional study, publicly accessible medical school and affiliated hospital websites in the US and Puerto Rico were searched from January 15 to July 15, 2022, to collect demographic and leadership data about surgical faculty. Two independent reviewers abstracted demographic data, with up to 2 additional reviewers assisting with coding resolution as necessary. In all, 2165 faculty were included in the analyses. Proportions of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity among chairs, VCs, and DCs in general surgery and 5 surgical specialties (neurosurgery, obstetrics and gynecology, ophthalmology, orthopedics, and otolaryngology). A total of 2165 faculty (1815 males [83.8%] and 350 females [16.2%]; 109 [5.0%] African American or Black individuals; 347 [16.0%] Asian individuals; 83 [3.8%] Hispanic, Latino, or individuals of Spanish origin; and 1624 [75.0%] White individuals as well as 2 individuals [0.1%] of other race or ethnicity) at 154 surgical departments affiliated with 146 medical schools in the US and Puerto Rico were included in the analysis. There were more males than females in leadership positions at all levels-chairs (85.9% vs 14.1%), VCs (68.4% vs 31.6%), and DCs (87.1% vs 12.9%)-and only 192 leaders (8.9%) were from racial or ethnic groups that are underrepresented in medicine (URiM). Females occupied more VC than chair or DC positions both overall (31.6% vs 14.1% and 12.9%, respectively) and within racial and ethnic groups (African American or Black females, 4.0% VC vs 1.5% chair and 0.6% DC positions; P < .001). URiM individuals were most commonly VCs of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI, 51.6%) or faculty development (17.9%). Vice chairs of faculty development were split equally between males and females, while 64.5% of VCs for DEI were female. All other VCs were predominantly male. Among DC roles, URiM representation was greatest in transplant surgery (13.8%) and lowest in oral and maxillofacial surgery (5.0%). Except for breast and endocrine surgery (63.6% female), females comprised less than 20% of DC roles. Nearly half of DCs (6 of 13 [46.2%]) and VCs (4 of 9 [44.4%]) had no female URiM leaders, and notably, no American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander individuals were identified in any surgical leadership positions. While it is unclear whether promotion from VC to chair or from DC to chair is more likely, these findings of similar gender distribution between chairs and DCs suggest the latter and may partially explain persistent nondiversity among surgical chairs. Female and URiM surgical leaders are disproportionately clustered in roles (eg, VCs of DEI or faculty development) that may not translate into future promotion to department chairs.

Cross-Cultural Mentorship in Military Family Medicine: Defining the Problem.

Mentorship is critical to physician recruitment, career development, and retention. Many underrepresented in medicine (URiM) physicians experience minority taxes that can undermine their professional objectives. Use of cross-cultural mentoring skills to navigate differences between non-URiM and URiM physicians can make mentorship relationships with URiM physicians more effective. This survey examined military family physician demographics and mentorship practices. Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study using voluntary, anonymous data from the 2021 Uniformed Services Academy of Family Physicians (USAFP) Annual Meeting Omnibus Survey. USAFP Members attending 2021 Virtual Annual Meeting. None. Descriptive statistics and χ2 tests. The response rate to the omnibus survey was 52.9%, n=258. More than half of respondents did not have a URiM mentee and had not collaborated with a URiM colleague on a scholarly activity within the last 3 years. Only 54.7% of respondents could recognize and address minority taxes. URiM physicians were more likely to have a URiM mentee (65.4% vs 44.4%, P=.042) and to recognize and address minority taxes (84.6% vs 51.3%, P=.001). They also were more confident (84.6% vs 60.3%, P=.015) and more skilled in discussing racism (80.8% vs 58.2%, P=.026). Structured programs are needed to improve knowledge and skills to support cross-cultural mentorship. Additional studies are needed to further evaluate and identify implementation strategies.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Pediatric Pulmonary Workforce: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.

Despite growing recognition of the need for increased diversity among students, trainees, and faculty in health care, the medical workforce still lacks adequate representation from groups historically underrepresented in medicine (URiM). The subspecialty field of pediatric pulmonology is no exception. Although there have been efforts to address issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in our own field, gaps persist. To address these gaps, the members of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Advisory Group (DEI-AG) of the American Thoracic Society Pediatrics Assembly created and distributed a Needs Assessment Survey in the United States and Canada to better understand the racial and ethnic demographics of the pediatric pulmonary workforce and to learn more about successes, gaps, and opportunities to enhance how we recruit, train, and retain a diverse workforce. The DEI-AG leadership cochairs convened a workshop to review the findings of the DEI Needs Assessment Survey and to develop strategies to improve the recruitment and retention of URiM fellows and faculty. This Official ATS Workshop Report aims to identify barriers and opportunities for recruitment, training, and career development within the field of pediatric pulmonology. Additionally, we offer useful strategies and resources to improve the recruitment of URiM residents, the mentorship of trainees and junior faculty, and the career development of URiM faculty in academic centers. This Workshop Report is an important first deliverable by the DEI-AG. We hope that this work, originating from within the Pediatrics Assembly, will serve as a model for other Assemblies, disciplines across the ATS, and other fields in Pediatrics.

Building a Diverse Pathway into Radiation Oncology: The Initial 12-Year Experience of the ASTRO Medical Student Fellowship Program for Underrepresented Populations

Historic radiation oncology (RO) workforce trends reveal underrepresentation and lack of inclusion of racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine (UIM). In 2010, ASTRO's Healthcare Access and Training Subcommittee - the predecessor of today's Committee on Health Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion - launched the Medical Student Fellowship (MSF), which provides an 8-week clinical and research experience, ASTRO mentorship, and a $5,000 stipend. Here, we premier 12-year MSF outcomes to 1) characterize the cohort, 2) identify predictors of successfully awarded applicants, and 3) determine predictors for entering RO residency. Demographic characteristics of MSF applicants were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoints were awarded MSF and RO match. Applicant data were collected from the ASTRO registry, MSF database, and online searches. Race, gender, medical school rank/region, mentor research center rank/region, application year, research type, RO residency affiliation, and award outcomes were collected. Descriptive statistics were tabulated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models calculated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for factors associated with MSF award receipt and matching into RO residency for those who applied via the Match. Between 2010 and 2022, there were 101 MSF applicants (74 Clinical and 27 Basic Science) for a total of 39 available funded MSF awards, with an overall MSF award rate of 39%. Applicants were 62% Black, 32% Hispanic, 3% Asian, 1% American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN), and 1% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHPI). Women comprised 42% of applicants and 51% of awardees. Awardees were 72% Black, 26% Hispanic, and 3% NHPI. By region, awardees were from medical schools in the South (44%), Northeast (31%), Midwest (18%), West (5%), and Caribbean (2%). Since 2010, among applicants, 63% matched into residency and 40% matched to RO. Among the 21 MSF awardees eligible for the Match, 13 (62%) pursued RO with 100% matched into RO. On adjusted analysis, no significant factors predicted a successful MSF application. However, among those who entered residency the only variable that predicted matching into RO was a successful MSF award (aOR = 4.1; 95% CI = 1.1-11.2). To date, MSF awardees who completed RO residency entered academic careers post-residency. The first 12 years of the MSF program demonstrate an overall high rate of recruitment and retention into RO. Retention of women and recruitment of Indigenous students in the MSF are an unmet need. Future efforts and increased funding are needed to further expand the MSF program, understand student barriers, provide longitudinal engagement, train mentors, and increase recruitment and retention of UIM groups in the field.

Selection and Recruitment Strategies among Competitive Pediatric Training Programs and the Impact of Diversity

ObjectiveAspects of the written application, interview and ranking may negatively impact recruitment of underrepresented in medicine (URiM) applicants. Our objectives were to explore knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of pediatric faculty who assess potential trainees and how diversity impacts these assessments. MethodsWe performed qualitative interviews of 20 geographically diverse faculty at large pediatric residencies and fellowships. We analyzed data using the constant comparative method to develop themes. ResultsFour main themes emerged.1)Screening applications and offering interviews: A standardized process flawed by subjectivity. Participants screened applications for clinical skills, research activities, or unique attributes and assigned scores based on program values. Strategies to mitigate bias included a holistic approach to review and assigning lesser weight to board scores.2)Interviews: Personality matters. Participants used interviews to obtain additional information about applicants and to assess personality. Strategies to decrease bias included the use of behavior-based questions and blinding interviewers to the application.3)Determination of the rank list: The rise and fall of applicants. Initial rank lists were informed by local scoring systems. Many participants altered lists through subjective inputs from the selection committee. Mitigation strategies included intentional discussion of bias and intentional changes to promote diversity.4)The recruitment process: Values, challenges, and strategies to promote diversity. Most programs enacted bias training and purposeful URiM recruitment. ConclusionsWe describe ways in which bias infiltrates recruitment and strategies to promote diversity. Many strategies are variably implemented and the impact on workforce diversity in pediatric training programs remains unknown.

SHARPening Residency Selection: Implementing a Systematic Holistic Application Review Process.

Traditional metrics used in residency application review processes are systematically biased against applicants from minoritized communities that are underrepresented in medicine (URiM). These biases harm not just URiM applicants but also residency programs and patients. Although several residency programs have implemented holistic reviews to mitigate these biases, few tested tools exist that can be adapted and implemented in a wide variety of settings within academic medicine. This article describes advances made in the third year of a longitudinal, ongoing quality improvement project that used the A3 framework to improve recruitment of URiM residents to a family medicine residency program. The authors devised a systematic holistic application review process (SHARP) to determine which applicants to invite to interview with the program. SHARP's development began in August 2019, and after significant discussion with program leadership and iterations of rubric refinement, the program adopted SHARP in September 2020 to review applications for the 2021 application cycle. Compared with the 2016 to 2020 period before SHARP implementation, data from the 2021 and 2022 residency application cycles after SHARP implementation showed a significant increase in the proportion of interviewed candidates who identify as URiM (from 23% to 38%, P < .001) and matched candidates who identify as URiM (from 27% to 62%, P = .004). There was also a notable increase in the number and diversity of reviewers who evaluated applicants to the program. SHARP is a promising tool to mitigate the effects of racism and other biases against URiM applicants to residency programs. Residency programs across specialties may benefit from adopting SHARP and adapting it based on their own goals and priorities.

Pro-Con Debate: Consideration of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Is Detrimental to Successful Mentorship.

Anesthesiology remains a specialty with low representation of women or members of racial and ethnic groups considered underrepresented in medicine (UiM). In the United States, women account for 33% of anesthesiology residents, while physicians identifying as Black, African American, Latinx, American Indian, or Alaska Native account for approximately 10%. Underrepresentation of these groups is even more pronounced in academic anesthesiology, especially at the senior ranks and roles, such as department chairs. Leaders in the field have recently shared recommendations for how individual departments, medical schools, hospitals, and professional organizations can create and support a more diverse anesthesiology workforce. These commentaries have often stressed the importance of mentorship for supporting women and physicians from UiM groups, including mentorship of trainees and practicing anesthesiologists seeking to advance their careers. While the value of mentorship is undisputed, it remains a matter of controversy whether race, ethnicity, or gender should be explicitly considered by mentoring programs and individual mentors. In this article, we discuss whether and how race, ethnicity, and gender should be considered in the setting of mentorship programs and the formation of individual mentoring relationships, as well as some of the potential consequences that lie therein.

Abortion Provision Among Family Physicians Underrepresented in Medicine.

Workforce diversity in primary care is critical for improved health outcomes and mitigation of inequities. However, little is known about the racial and ethnic identities, training histories, and practice patterns of family physicians who provide abortions. Family physicians who graduated from residency programs with routine abortion training from 2015 through 2018 completed an anonymous electronic cross-sectional survey. We measured abortion training, intentions to provide abortion, and practice patterns, and examined differences between underrepresented in medicine (URM) and non-URM physicians using χ2 tests and binary logistic regression. Two hundred ninety-eight respondents completed the survey (39% response rate), 17% of whom were URM. Similar percentages of URM and non-URM respondents had abortion training and had intended to provide abortions. However, fewer URMs reported providing procedural abortion in their postresidency practice (6% vs 19%, P=.03) and providing abortion in the past year (6% vs 20%, P=.023). In adjusted analyses, URMs were less likely to have provided abortions after residency (OR=.383, P=.03) and in the past year (OR=.217, P=.02) compared to non-URMs. Of the 16 noted barriers to provision, few differences were evident between groups on the indicators measured. Differences in postresidency abortion provision existed between URM and non-URM family physicians despite similar training and intentions to provide. Examined barriers do not explain these differences. Further research on the unique experiences of URM physicians in abortion care is needed to then consider which strategies for building a more diverse workforce should be employed.

Operation Diversify Plastic Surgery: An Innovative Strategy to Increase Diversity in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Healthcare disparities remain a significant problem facing the US healthcare system with recent evidence of persistent racial and ethnic disparities especially among patients from minority backgrounds. Recent studies have documented advantages to a racially and ethnically diverse surgical workforce such as higher patient satisfaction scores, superior patient compliance with physician recommendations, and increased participation in clinical research studies by minority patients. In plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS), there is a noted deficit among residents and faculty that come from ethnically underrepresented in medicine (URiM) backgrounds despite recent efforts to increase diversity in PRS surgeons. URiM medical students from three of the four historically Black medical universities organized to discuss pathways to PRS. Operation Diversify Plastic Surgery is a student-led organization that was developed to address the lack of diversity in PRS, challenges faced by students from institutions that lack PRS residency training programs, and unique factors that affect URiM students interested in PRS. Available studies note that mentoring relationships and research opportunities were instrumental in recruiting URiM students into PRS residency programs. Operation Diversify Plastic Surgery is an innovative solution to the insufficient URiM PRS residency candidate pool by increasing medical student exposure to PRS via educational lectures, virtual mentoring opportunities, and insights into research fellowships.

Sex and Racial and Ethnic Diversity Among Ophthalmology Subspecialty Fellowship Applicants

Physician-patient concordance in sex and race is associated with improved patient outcomes. Studies have explored diversity among ophthalmology residents and faculty, but to our knowledge, not among ophthalmology fellows. To assess diversity by sex and race and ethnicity among fellowship applicants in ophthalmology subspecialties and compare match rates by applicants' sex and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status. This cohort study examined ophthalmology subspecialty fellowship data from the 2021 San Francisco Match. Applicant characteristics were stratified by sex and URiM status and compared using χ2, Mann-Whitney U, and median tests. For applicants who matched, the percentages of female and URiM applicants were compared among the ophthalmic subspecialties. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to assess the association of applicant characteristics with their match outcomes. Included in the sample were 537 candidates who applied for an ophthalmology fellowship using the 2021 San Francisco Match; 224 applicants (42.6%) were female, and 60 applicants (12.9%) had URiM status. Females and males had similar match rates (70.5% [n = 158] and 69.2% [n = 209], respectively; P = .74), but females had a higher median (IQR) US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score (248 [240-258] vs 245 [234-254]; P = .01). The pediatric ophthalmology subspecialty had the highest percentage of female matched applicants (67.5%; 27 of 40 matched applicants), while the retina subspecialty had the highest percentage of males (68.9%; 84 of 122 matched applicants). URiM applicants had lower match rates (55.0%, n = 33) than non-URiM applicants (72.2%, n = 293; P = .007). The URiM applicants had lower median (IQR) scores on the USMLE Step 1 (238 [227-247]) compared with Asian applicants (246 [235-254]) and White applicants (243 [231-252]; P = .04). Additionally, URIM applicants submitted fewer median (IQR) applications (10 [1-23]) than Asian (21 [8-37]) and White (17 [8-32]; P = .001) applicants and completed fewer interviews (median [IQR], 2 [0-11]) than Asian (median [IQR], 12 [3-18]) and White applicants (median [IQR], 8 [1-14]; P = .001). Among matched fellows in each subspecialty, URiM applicants comprised 13.9% (n = 11) in glaucoma, 10% (n = 4) in pediatric ophthalmology, 7.3% (n = 6) in cornea, and 6.6% (n = 8) in retina. Ophthalmology subspecialty fellowship match rates were lower for URiM vs non-URiM applicants in 2021. Underrepresentation of females exists in the retina subspecialty, while racial and ethnic differences exist in all ophthalmology subspecialty fellowships examined. Monitoring trends in fellowship diversity over time should help inform where targeted efforts could improve diversity.

Upholding Our PROMISE: Underrepresented in Medicine Pediatric Residents' Perspectives on Interventions to Promote Belonging.

Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents experience challenges during training that threaten their sense of belonging in medicine; therefore, residency programs should intentionally implement interventions to promote belonging. This study explored UIM pediatric residents' perspectives on current residency program measures designed to achieve this goal. The authors conducted a secondary qualitative analysis as part of a national cross-sectional study, PROmoting Med-ed Insight into Supportive Environments (PROMISE), which explored pediatric residents' experiences and perspectives during training in relation to their self-identities. A 23-item web-based survey was distributed through the Association of Pediatric Program Directors Longitudinal Educational Research Assessment Network from October 2020 to January 2021. Participants provided free-text responses to the question "What are current measures that promote a sense of belonging for the UIM community in your training program?" The authors used conventional content analysis to code and identify themes in responses from UIM participants. Of the 1,748 residents invited to participate, 931 (53%) residents from 29 programs completed the survey, with 167 (18%) identifying as UIM. Of the 167 UIM residents, 74 (44%) residents from 22 programs responded to the free-text question. The authors coded more than 140 unique free-text responses and identified 7 major themes: (1) critical mass of UIM residents; (2) focused recruitment of UIM residents; (3) social support, including opportunities to build community among UIM residents; (4) mentorship; (5) caring and responsive leadership; (6) education on health disparities, diversity, equity, inclusion, and antiracism; and (7) opportunities to serve, including giving back to the local community and near-peer mentorship of UIM premedical and medical students. This is the first national study to describe UIM pediatric residents' perspectives on interventions that promote a sense of belonging. Programs should consider implementing these interventions to foster inclusion and belonging among UIM trainees.

Use of Simulation Resources for Underrepresented in Medicine Youth Engagement: A National Survey of Academic Anesthesiology Programs With Specified Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Positions.

Background The utilization of simulation resources can be an effective strategy to offer early medical exposure to underrepresented in medicine (URiM) youth populations, with the objective of promoting diversity in the field of medicine. Currently, it is unclear what proportion of academic anesthesiology programs with simulation centers utilize these resources for community engagement events. Methodology A survey was created using REDCap® and distributed via email to 38 anesthesiologists from 30 departments in the United States holding a leadership position dedicated to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion. The survey assessed whether their programs had conducted community engagement events for URiM students, what simulation resources were available at their program, and which of these resources they had used at any community engagement events. Additionally, we assessed program characteristics such as region, academic versus community practice, and urban versus rural locations. Survey responses were collected between March and April 2023. Results We received responses from 15 of the 30 institutions sampled for an institutional response rate of 50%. The majority of respondents (86.7%) reported holding community engagement events. Most respondents reported a wide variety of simulation resources available, including 11 (73.3%) having access to full simulation centers. However, only three (27.3%) of the 11 with full simulation centers reported utilizing them for community events. Conclusions Despite the potential benefits of using simulation resources for community engagement events, our results suggest that academic anesthesiology departments may not commonly utilize simulation centers to provide URiM youth with exposure to the field of medicine. Anesthesiology departments with access to simulation resources are in a unique position to be leaders in advancing diversity in medicine by increasing URiM youth interest in medicine as a career through simulation-based exposure.

Michigan Urology Academy—Our Role in Diversifying the Urology Workforce

To evaluate the value/utility of developing an online mentorship program for underrepresented in medicine (URiM) students interested in urology. The Michigan Urology Academy (MUA) was launched in 2020 to increase exposure and provide mentorship to URiM students interested in urology, in an effort to address the continued low numbers of Black and LatinX urologists in the workforce. The 2-day virtual mentorship program was launched in June 2020 and held annually thereafter. Demographic information was collected, and surveys were distributed at 1week and 3months after the events. Surveys assessed participants' perception of the utility and effectiveness of the sessions. Thematic analysis was performed on qualitative data. Fourth-year med students were followed longitudinally to determine urology match results. Over the last 3years, MUA hosted 208 students from 104 medical schools. Participants self-identified as 42.3% (n=88) identified as African American/Black, 14.9% (n=31) Hispanic/LatinX, 12.98% (n=27) white, 18.75% (n=39) as Asian/Indian 7.7% (n=16) as Middle Eastern/North African, and 0.48% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (n=1). Overall, fourth-year MUA participants matched at a higher rate than the national average (80.2% vs 71.4%; P=.0486). Narrative feedback revealed five themes: (1) the importance of community support within urology, (2) the utility of vulnerability and storytelling, (3) the importance of representation of diverse backgrounds, (4) the desire for in-person mentorship opportunities, and (5) the need for transparency in application logistics. Mentorship programs such as MUA allow URiM students to have greater exposure to the field of urology and to networking opportunities.

Does Masking MCAT Scores During Admissions Increase Equity?

To improve admissions process equity, the Uniformed Services University masked Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores at or above the 51st percentile to admissions committee members. This policy was aimed at improving admissions rates for applicants in 2 priority groups: those from races and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine (URM) and those from lower socioeconomic status, represented by first-generation college (FGC) graduates. All applicants invited to interview were included: 1,624 applicants from admissions years 2014-2016 before MCAT score masking and 1,668 applicants from admissions years 2018-2020 during MCAT score masking. Logistic regression determined admissions likelihood before and during masking. Independent sample t tests compared average admissions committee scores for all applicants and for those in priority groups. Linear regression determined the weight of MCAT scores on admissions committee scores. Despite there being more priority group applicants during MCAT score masking, the admissions likelihood for an individual priority group applicant decreased during this period. URM applicants had an odds ratio of 0.513 for acceptance during MCAT score masking compared to before masking, and FGC applicants had an odds ratio of 0.695. Masking significantly reduced mean admissions committee scores, which decreased approximately twice as much for priority group applicants as for nonpriority group applicants (0.96 points vs 0.51 points). These score decreases were highest for priority group applicants with MCAT scores above the 67th percentile. Masking reduced the weight of MCAT scores; 10.9% of admissions committee score variance was explained by MCAT scores before masking and only 1.2% during masking. Despite known disparities in MCAT scores with respect to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, admissions decisions in this study were more equitable when MCAT scores were included. While masking MCAT scores reduced the influence of the exam in admissions decisions, it also reduced admissions rates for URM and FGC applicants.

How Do Academic Medicine Pathways Differ for Underrepresented Trainees and Physicians? A Critical Scoping Review.

Academic medicine faces difficulty recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce. The proportion of medical students who are underrepresented in medicine (URiM) is smaller than the proportion of URiM's in the general population, and these numbers worsen with each step up the academic medicine ladder. Previously known as the "leaky pipeline," this phenomenon may be better understood as disparate "pathways with potholes," which acknowledges the different structural barriers that URiM trainees and faculty face in academic medicine. This critical scoping review analyzed current literature to determine what variables contribute to the inequitable "pathways and potholes" URiM physicians experience in academic medicine. The authors combined scoping review methodology with a critical lens. The comprehensive search strategy used terms about academic medicine, underrepresented groups, and leaving academic medical careers. One reviewer conducted screening, full text review, and data extraction while in consultation with members of the research team. Data extraction focused on themes related to pathways and potholes, such as attrition, recruitment, and retention in academic medicine. Themes were iteratively merged, and quality of contribution to the field and literature gaps were noted. Included papers clustered into attrition, recruitment, and retention. Those pertaining to attrition noted that URiM faculty are less likely to get promoted even when controlling for scholarly output, and a hostile work environment may exacerbate attrition. Recruitment and retention strategies were most effective when multi-pronged approaches changed every step of the recruitment and promotion processes. These studies provide examples of various "potholes" that can affect representation in academic medicine of URiM trainees and faculty. However, only a few studies examined the link between isolating and hostile work environments, the so-called "chilly climate," and attrition from academic medicine. Understanding these concepts is key to producing the most effective interventions to improve diversity in medicine.

Perceptual Barriers to Becoming a Plastic Surgeon among Underrepresented Medical Students.

The field of plastic surgery has experienced difficulty increasing diversity among trainees, despite significant efforts. Barriers to recruitment of underrepresented in medicine (URM) students are poorly understood. This study assesses URM students' exposure to plastic surgery, access to mentors and research opportunities, and the importance of diversity in the field. A survey was designed and distributed to members of the Student National Medical Association over 3 months. Survey data were collected using Qualtrics and descriptive statistics, and logistical regressions were performed using SAS. Of the 136 respondents, 75.0% identified as Black (n = 102/136), and 57.4% (n = 66/115) reported a plastic surgery program at their home institution. Of the total respondents, 97.7% (n = 127/130) were concerned about racial representation in plastic surgery, and 44.9% (n = 53/114) would be more likely to apply if there were better URM representation. Most respondents disagreed that there was local (73.4%, n = 58/79) or national (79.2%, n = 57/72) interest in URM recruitment. Students whose plastic surgery programs had outreach initiatives were more likely to have attending (OR 11.7, P < 0.05) or resident mentors (OR 3.0 P < 0.05) and access to research opportunities (OR 4.3, P < 0.05). URM students feel there is an evident lack of interest in recruiting URM applicants in plastic surgery. Programs with outreach initiatives are more likely to provide URM students access to mentorship and research opportunities, allowing students to make informed decisions about pursuing plastic surgery.

Developing Evidence for Equitable Assessment Characteristics Based on Clinical Learner Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments.

Medical education is only beginning to explore the factors that contribute to equitable assessment in clinical settings. Increasing knowledge about equitable assessment ensures a quality medical education experience that produces an excellent, diverse physician workforce equipped to address the health care disparities facing patients and communities. Through the lens of the Anti-Deficit Achievement framework, the authors aimed to obtain evidence for a model for equitable assessment in clinical training. A discrete choice experiment approach was used which included an instrument with 6 attributes each at 2 levels to reveal learner preferences for the inclusion of each attribute in equitable assessment. Self-identified underrepresented in medicine (UIM) and not underrepresented in medicine (non-UIM) (N = 306) fourth-year medical students and senior residents in medicine, pediatrics, and surgery at 9 institutions across the United States completed the instrument. A mixed-effects logit model was used to determine attributes learners valued most. Participants valued the inclusion of all assessment attributes provided except for peer comparison. The most valued attribute of an equitable assessment was how learner identity, background, and trajectory were appreciated by clinical supervisors. The next most valued attributes were assessment of growth, supervisor bias training, narrative assessments, and assessment of learner's patient care, with participants willing to trade off any of the attributes to get several others. There were no significant differences in value placed on assessment attributes between UIM and non-UIM learners. Residents valued clinical supervisors valuing learner identity, background, and trajectory and clinical supervisor bias training more so than medical students. This study offers support for the components of an antideficit-focused model for equity in assessment and informs efforts to promote UIM learner success and guide equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives in medical education.