Toward Better Descriptions of Innovations
Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges (Impact Factor: 3.47). 09/2008; 83(8):703-4. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181838a2c
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Many U.S. populations experience significant health disparities. Increasing health care providers' awareness of and education about sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) diversity could help reduce health disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) patients. The authors share the University of California, Davis, Health System's (UCDHS's) experience as it became the first U.S. academic health center to formally introduce patient SO/GI demographic data into its electronic health record (EHR) as a step toward reducing LGBT health disparities. Adding these data to the EHR initially met with resistance. The authors, members of the UCDHS Task Force for Inclusion of SO/GI in the EHR, viewed this resistance as an invitation to educate leaders, providers, and staff about LGBT health disparities and to expose providers to techniques for discussing SO/GI with patients. They describe the strategies they employed to effect institutional culture change, including involvement of senior leadership, key informant interviews, educational outreach via grand rounds and resident workshops, and creation of a patient safety net through inviting providers to self-identify as welcoming LGBT patients. The ongoing cultural change process has inspired spin-off projects contributing to an improved climate for LGBT individuals at UCDHS, including an employee organization supporting SO/GI diversity, support for and among LGBT medical learners through events and listservs, development and implementation of an LGBT health curriculum, and creation of peer navigator programs for LGBT patients with cancer. The authors reflect on lessons learned and on institutional pride in and commitment to providing quality care for LGBT patients.Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 08/2014; DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000467 · 3.47 Impact Factor
Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 10/2013; 88(10):1401-2. DOI:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a34d39 · 3.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Curricular integration has emerged as a consistent theme in medical education reform. Vertical integration of topics such as pathology offers the potential to bring basic science content into the clinical arena, but faculty/student acceptance and curricular design pose challenges for such integration. The authors describe the Cadaver Biopsy Project (CBP) at Boston University School of Medicine as a sustainable model of vertical integration. Faculty and select senior medical students obtained biopsies of cadavers during the first-year gross anatomy course (fall 2009) and used these to develop clinical cases for courses in histology (spring 2010), pathology (fall 2010-spring 2011), and radiology (fall 2011 or spring 2012), thereby linking students' first experiences in basic sciences with other basic science courses and later clinical courses. Project goals included engaging medical students in applying basic science principles in all aspects of patient care as they acquire skills. The educational intervention used a patient (cadaver)-centered approach and small-group, collaborative, case-based learning. Through this project, the authors involved clinical and basic science faculty-plus senior medical students-in a collaborative project to design and implement an integrated curriculum through which students revisited, at several different points, the microscopic structure and pathophysiology of common diseases. Developing appropriate, measurable outcomes for medical education initiatives, including the CBP, is challenging. Accumulation of qualitative feedback from surveys will guide continuous improvement of the CBP. Documenting longer-term impact of the curricular innovation on test scores and other competency-based outcomes is an ultimate goal.Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 11/2013; 89(1). DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000054 · 3.47 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.