Development of an Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Anti-racism Pledge as the Foundation for Action in an Academic Department of Neurology

Will they always be living the Sisyphus punishment? The triple whammy for racialized women: a qualitative investigation of primary care researchers in Canada

Background

Existing literature overlooks the role of gender and race on research productivity, particularly in the context of primary care research. This study examines how gender and race influence the research productivity of primary care researchers in Canada, addressing a gap in existing literature.

Methods

Qualitative, descriptive methods were used, involving 60-min interviews with 23 Canadian primary care researchers. 13 participants were female (57%) and 10 participants (43%) were male. Fourteen participants were White (non-racialized; 61%), 8 were racialized (35%) and 1 did not comment on race (4%). Reflexive thematic analysis captured participant perceptions of factors influencing research productivity, including individual, professional, institutional, and systemic aspects.

Findings

Systemic bias and institutional culture, including racism, sexism, and unconscious biases against racialized women, emerge as key barriers to research productivity. The parenting life stage further compounds these biases. Barriers include lack of representation in faculty roles, toxic work environments, research productivity metrics, and exclusion by colleagues. Participants indicated that institutional reforms and systemic interventions are needed to foster a diverse, equitable, and inclusive environment. Strategies include recruiting equity-focused leaders, increasing representation of racialized female faculty, diversity training, mentorship programs, providing meaningful support, flexible work arrangements, and protected research time. Sponsors can offer more targeted grants for female and racialized researchers. Adjusting metrics for gender, race, parenthood, and collaborative metrics is proposed to enhance diversity and inclusion among researchers.

Interpretation

This study underscores the importance of addressing systemic bias at institutional and systemic levels to create a fair and supportive environment for primary care researchers. A multitude of strategies are needed including increasing representation of racialized female faculty, creating supportive and psychologically safe work environments, and public reporting of data on faculty composition for accreditation and funding decisions. Together, these strategies can alleviate the triple whammy and free these researchers from the Sisyphus Punishment - the absurdity of being asked to climb a hill while pushing a boulder with no hope of reaching the top.

Funding

College of Family Physicians of Canada.

Building an ethnically and racially diverse neurology workforce

As diversity among patient populations continues to grow, racial and ethnic diversity in the neurology workforce is increasingly essential to the delivery of culturally competent care and for enabling inclusive, generalizable clinical research. Unfortunately, diversity in the workforce is an area in which the field of neurology has historically lagged and faces formidable challenges, including an inadequate number of trainees entering the field, bias experienced by trainees and faculty from minoritized racial and ethnic backgrounds, and 'diversity tax', the disproportionate burden of service work placed on minoritized people in many professions. Although neurology departments, professional organizations and relevant industry partners have come to realize the importance of diversity to the field and have taken steps to promote careers in neurology for people from minoritized backgrounds, additional steps are needed. Such steps include the continued creation of diversity leadership roles in neurology departments and organizations, the creation of robust pipeline programmes, aggressive recruitment and retention efforts, the elevation of health equity research and engagement with minoritized communities. Overall, what is needed is a shift in culture in which diversity is adopted as a core value in the field.

Health equity integrated epilepsy care and research: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

With the unanimous approval of the Intersectoral Global Action Plan on epilepsy and other neurological disorders by the World Health Organization in May 2022, there are strong imperatives to work towards equitable neurological care.

AIMS

Using epilepsy as an entry point to other neurologic conditions, we discuss disparities faced by marginalized groups including racial/ethnic minorities, Americans living in rural communities, and Americans with low socioeconomic status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Institute on Minority Health Disparities Research Framework (NIMHD) was used to conduct a narrative review through a health equity lens to create an adapted framework for epilepsy and propose approaches to working towards equitable epilepsy and neurological care.

RESULTS

In this narrative review, we identified priority populations (racial and ethnic minority, rural-residing, and low socioeconomic status persons with epilepsy) and outcomes (likelihood to see a neurologist, be prescribed antiseizure medications, undergo epilepsy surgery, and be hospitalized) to explore disparities in epilepsy and guide our focused literature search using PubMed. In an adapted NIMHD framework, we examined individual, interpersonal, community, and societal level contributors to health disparities across five domains: (1) behavioral, (2) physical/built environment, (3) sociocultural, (4) environment, and (5) healthcare system. We take a health equity approach to propose initiatives that target modifiable factors that impact disparities and advocate for sustainable change for priority populations.

DISCUSSION

To improve equity, healthcare providers and relevant societal stakeholders can advocate for improved care coordination, referrals for epilepsy surgery, access to care, health informatics interventions, and education (i.e., to providers, patients, and communities). More broadly, stakeholders can advocate for reforms in medical education, and in the American health insurance landscape.

CONCLUSIONS

Equitable healthcare should be a priority in neurological care.

Neurology Education in 2035: The Neurology Future Forecasting Series

In the past decade, there have been dramatic changes in all aspects of neurologic care, and along with this, neurology education has transformed. These changes have affected all aspects of education across the educational continuum, including learners, teachers, educators, content, delivery methods, assessments, and outcomes. Health systems science, health humanities, diversity, equity, and inclusion and health disparities are becoming core components of neurology curricula, and, in the future, will be integrated into every aspect of our educational mission. The ways in which material is taught and learned have been influenced by technologic innovations and a growing understanding of the science of learning. We forecast that this trend will continue, with learners choosing from an array of electronic resources to engage with fundamental topics, allowing front-line clinical teachers to spend more time supporting critical reasoning and teaching students how to learn. There has been a growing differentiation of educational roles (i.e., teachers, educators, and scholars). We forecast that these roles will become more distinct, each with an individualized pattern of support and expectations. Assessment has become more aligned with the work of the learners, and there are growing calls to focus more on the impact of educational programs on patient care. We forecast that there will be an increased emphasis on educational outcomes and public accountability for training programs. In this article, we reflect on the history of medical education in neurology and explore the current state to forecast the future of neurology education and discuss ways in which we can prepare.