Effective Mentorship as a Means to Recruit, Retain, and Promote Underrepresented Minorities in Academic Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Diversity, equity, and inclusion in gastrointestinal endoscopy: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Position Statement

1:  The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) adheres to the overarching principles of equality of opportunity, fair treatment, nondiscrimination, and diversity of health care professionals. 2:  ESGE strongly supports the creation of collaborations within and between national and international endoscopy societies to disseminate the principles of diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) in the field of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. 3:  ESGE aims to reflect the diversity of its membership in all its scientific and educational activities. 4:  ESGE supports the fostering of collaborative work settings that empower all members of the endoscopy team to reach their full potential. 5:  ESGE supports international and national endoscopy societies in promoting equitable access to high quality endoscopy training. 6:  ESGE recommends the implementation of ergonomic principles in endoscopy units to prevent injuries and to provide adapted workplace conditions for personnel with disabilities and/or special needs. 7:  ESGE recommends comprehensive mentorship, that includes diverse backgrounds, and equitable sponsorship for professional development, training, and academic excellence. 8:  ESGE recommends that endoscopists actively identify, discuss, and attempt to accommodate reasonable patient preferences and expectations regarding endoscopy procedures. 9:  ESGE advocates for educational and awareness campaigns targeting both health care professionals and patients, as well as the adoption of cost-effective health care strategies to address disparities and enhance equity in endoscopy care. 10:  ESGE is committed to increasing support for underrepresented scholars and minorities pursuing research in endoscopy. 11:  ESGE identifies mentorship and sponsorship as factors that may mitigate the barriers to academic careers for underrepresented endoscopy scholars. 12:  ESGE recognizes the need to increase awareness of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the field of endoscopy and supports publications on these topics.

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

PURPOSE

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.

METHOD

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

How to Sponsor, Coach, and Mentor: A Qualitative Study With Family Medicine Department Chairs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to explore how to use sponsoring, coaching, and mentoring (SCM) for faculty development by clarifying the functions embedded in SCM. The study aims to ensure that department chairs can be intentional in providing those functions and/or playing those roles for the benefit of all their faculty.

METHODS

We used qualitative, semistructured interviews in this study. We followed a purposeful sampling strategy to recruit a diverse sample of family medicine department chairs across the United States. Participants were asked about their experiences receiving and providing sponsoring, coaching, and mentoring. We iteratively coded audio recorded and transcribed interviews for content and themes.

RESULTS

We interviewed 20 participants between December 2020 and May 2021 to identify actions associated with sponsoring, coaching, and mentoring. Participants identified six main actions sponsors perform. These actions are identifying opportunities, recognizing an individual's strengths, encouraging opportunity-seeking, offering tangible support, optimizing candidacy, nominating as a candidate, and promising support. In contrast, they identified seven main actions a coach performs. These are clarifying, advising, giving resources, performing critical appraisals, giving feedback, reflecting, and scaffolding (ie, providing support while learning). Finally, participants identified six main actions the mentors perform. The list includes checking in, listening, sharing wisdom, directing, supporting, and collaborating.

CONCLUSIONS

We present SCM as an identifiable series of actions that need to be thought of and performed intentionally. Our clarification will help leaders purposefully select their actions and allows opportunity for evaluating their effectiveness. Future research will explore developing and evaluating programs that support learning how to provide SCM in order to enhance the process of faculty development and provide it equitably.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion in gastroenterology and hepatology: a survey of where we stand

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the setting of increasing attention to representation in medicine, we aimed to assess current perspectives of racial and ethnic workforce diversity and health care disparities among gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology professionals in the United States.

METHODS

We developed and administered a 33-item electronic cross-sectional survey to members of 5 national GI and hepatology societies. Survey items were organized into thematic modules and solicited perspectives on racial and ethnic workforce diversity, health care disparities in GI and hepatology, and potential interventions to enhance workforce diversity and improve health equity.

RESULTS

Of the 1219 survey participants, 62.3% were male, 48.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 19.9% were from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine. The most frequently reported barriers to increasing racial and ethnic diversity in GI and hepatology were insufficient representation of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups in the education and training pipeline (n = 431 [35.4%]), in professional leadership (n = 340 [27.9%]), and among practicing GI and hepatology professionals (n = 324 [26.6%]). Suggested interventions were to increase career mentorship opportunities (n = 545 [44.7%]), medical student opportunities (n = 520 [42.7%]), and program and professional society leadership roles for underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups (n = 473 [38.8%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey explored imperative and timely perspectives on racial and ethnic representation and health equity among professionals in GI and hepatology. The findings should inform future interventions to address workforce diversity and establish priorities toward improving health equity, ultimately serving as a springboard for professional societies, academic institutions, and other organizations that aim to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Gastroenterology and Hepatology: A Survey of Where We Stand

INTRODUCTION

In the setting of increasing attention to representation in medicine, we aimed to assess current perspectives of racial and ethnic workforce diversity and health care disparities among gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology professionals in the United States.

METHODS

We developed and administered a 33-item electronic cross-sectional survey to members of 5 national GI and hepatology societies. Survey items were organized into thematic modules and solicited perspectives on racial and ethnic workforce diversity, health care disparities in GI and hepatology, and potential interventions to enhance workforce diversity and improve health equity.

RESULTS

Of the 1,219 survey participants, 62.3% were male, 48.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 19.9% were from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine. The most frequently reported barriers to increasing racial and ethnic diversity in GI and hepatology were insufficient representation of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups in the education and training pipeline (n = 431 [35.4%]), in professional leadership (n = 340 [27.9%]), and among practicing GI and hepatology professionals (n = 324 [26.6%]). Suggested interventions were to increase career mentorship opportunities (n = 545 [44.7%]), medical student opportunities (n = 520 [42.7%]), and program and professional society leadership roles for underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups (n = 473 [38.8%]).

DISCUSSION

Our survey explored imperative and timely perspectives on racial and ethnic representation and health equity among professionals in GI and hepatology. The findings should inform future interventions to address workforce diversity and establish priorities toward improving health equity, ultimately serving as a springboard for professional societies, academic institutions, and other organizations that aim to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Gastroenterology and Hepatology: A Survey of Where We Stand

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In the setting of increasing attention to representation in medicine, we aimed to assess current perspectives of racial and ethnic workforce diversity and health care disparities among gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology professionals in the United States.

METHODS

We developed and administered a 33-item electronic cross-sectional survey to members of 5 national GI and hepatology societies. Survey items were organized into thematic modules and solicited perspectives on racial and ethnic workforce diversity, health care disparities in GI and hepatology, and potential interventions to enhance workforce diversity and improve health equity.

RESULTS

Of the 1219 survey participants, 62.3% were male, 48.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 19.9% were from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine. The most frequently reported barriers to increasing racial and ethnic diversity in GI and hepatology were insufficient representation of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups in the education and training pipeline (n = 431 [35.4%]), in professional leadership (n = 340 [27.9%]), and among practicing GI and hepatology professionals (n = 324 [26.6%]). Suggested interventions were to increase career mentorship opportunities (n = 545 [44.7%]), medical student opportunities (n = 520 [42.7%]), and program and professional society leadership roles for underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups (n = 473 [38.8%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey explored imperative and timely perspectives on racial and ethnic representation and health equity among professionals in GI and hepatology. The findings should inform future interventions to address workforce diversity and establish priorities toward improving health equity, ultimately serving as a springboard for professional societies, academic institutions, and other organizations that aim to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Gastroenterology and Hepatology: A Survey of Where We Stand

INTRODUCTION

In the setting of increasing attention to representation in medicine, we aimed to assess current perspectives of racial and ethnic workforce diversity and health care disparities among gastroenterology (GI) and hepatology professionals in the United States.

METHODS

We developed and administered a 33-item electronic cross-sectional survey to members of 5 national GI and hepatology societies. Survey items were organized into thematic modules and solicited perspectives on racial and ethnic workforce diversity, health care disparities in GI and hepatology, and potential interventions to enhance workforce diversity and improve health equity.

RESULTS

Of the 1,219 survey participants, 62.3% were male, 48.7% were non-Hispanic White, and 19.9% were from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine. The most frequently reported barriers to increasing racial and ethnic diversity in GI and hepatology were insufficient representation of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups in the education and training pipeline (n = 431 [35.4%]), in professional leadership (n = 340 [27.9%]), and among practicing GI and hepatology professionals (n = 324 [26.6%]). Suggested interventions were to increase career mentorship opportunities (n = 545 [44.7%]), medical student opportunities (n = 520 [42.7%]), and program and professional society leadership roles for underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups (n = 473 [38.8%]).

DISCUSSION

Our survey explored imperative and timely perspectives on racial and ethnic representation and health equity among professionals in GI and hepatology. The findings should inform future interventions to address workforce diversity and establish priorities toward improving health equity, ultimately serving as a springboard for professional societies, academic institutions, and other organizations that aim to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field.

A review of racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in pediatric liver transplantation

Equity is a core principle in both pediatrics and solid organ transplantation. Health inequities, specifically across race, socioeconomic position, or geography, reflect a moral failure. Ethical principles of prudential life span, maximin principle, and fair innings argue for allocation priority to children related to the number of life years gained, equal access to transplant, and equal opportunity for ideal posttransplant outcomes. Iterative policy changes have aimed to narrow these disparities to achieve pediatric transplant equity. These policy changes have focused on modifying pediatric priority for organ allocation to eliminate mortality on the pediatric transplant waiting list. Yet disparities remain in pediatric liver transplantation at all time points: from access to referral for transplantation, likelihood of living donor transplantation, use of exception narratives, waitlist mortality, and inequitable posttransplant outcomes. Black children are less likely to be petitioned for exception scores, have higher waitlist mortality, are less likely to be the recipient of a living donor transplant, and have worse posttransplant outcomes compared with White children. Children living in the most socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods have worse posttransplant outcomes. Children living farther from a transplant center have higher waitlist mortality. Herein we review the current knowledge of these racial and ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities for these children. To achieve equity, stakeholder engagement is required at all levels from providers and health delivery systems, learning networks, institutions, and society. Future initiatives must be swift, bold, and effective with the tripartite mission to inform policy changes, improve health care delivery, and optimize resource allocation to provide equitable transplant access, waitlist survival, and posttransplant outcomes for all children.

Black voices in gastroenterology and hepatology

The Association of Black Gastroenterologists and Hepatologists (ABGH) was established to improve health equity in Black communities and to provide academic and social support for Black gastroenterologists and hepatologists. In this Viewpoint, four members of ABGH (early career, mid-career and late career) discuss their route into gastroenterology and hepatology, how academia and medicine can promote inclusivity and equity, and their advice to Black students interested in a career in medicine or science.

Examining the First Peer-to-Peer Mentorship Program (F1Doctors) for International Medical Students

In this study, we report international medical students in the United States and conduct an analysis of the first, peer-to-peer, national mentorship program for international medical students and international pre-med applicants in the US (F1Doctors). We used analyzed survey data collected through F1Doctors and the Association of American Medical Colleges yearly matriculation reports. Results indicated that the average college grade point average (GPA) and Medical College Admission Test score (MCAT) of international applicants was higher than that of all applicants. Additionally, non-US applicants reported facing numerous unique challenges such as limited access to extracurricular opportunities and difficulty finding mentors who are familiar with the application process. International applicants have the potential to increase the diversity of healthcare professionals, and F1Doctors is the first platform to support international healthcare applicants in the US.

Understanding racial disparities in the care of patients with irritable bowel syndrome: The need for a unified approach

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent disorder of gut-brain interaction, which significantly erodes the quality of life of those it affects. Recent studies have confirmed that its prevalence varies quite markedly between countries, implying that it is affected by cultural and socioeconomic factors. In an important study, Silvernale at al. have recently reported racial disparities including potential referral biases, with reduced opportunities to access specialist care and differing patterns of healthcare utilization affecting ethnic minority populations with IBS. Similar disparities have also been reported for other gastrointestinal disorders. In this paper, we, therefore, discuss the potential implications of such disparities and how they can impact clinical outcomes, and discuss ways in which this problem could be addressed, and highlighting areas for future research.