Background and Objectives: The influence of racism in medicine is increasingly acknowledged, and the negative effect of systemic racism on individual and population health is well established. Yet, little is known about how or whether medical students are being educated on this topic. This study investigated the presence and features of curricula related to systemic racism in North American family medicine clerkships. Methods: We conducted a survey of North American family medicine clerkship directors as part of the 2021 Council of Academic Family Medicine’s Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey. Results: The survey response rate was 49% (78/160). Almost all clerkship directors agreed (n=68; 97.1%) that teaching about racism at all levels of medical education was appropriate. Yet, 60% (n=42) of family medicine clerkship directors reported no formalized curriculum for teaching about racism or bias. Teaching about systemic racism was more likely to be present in the family medicine clerkship at institutions where clerkship directors reported that faculty receive 5 or more hours of training in racism and bias, as compared to institutions where faculty receive 4 or fewer hours of training in racism/bias (odds ratio 2.82, 95% CI 1.05-8.04, P=.045). Programs reported using racism in medicine curricula based in cultural competency (20%); structural competency (10%); both cultural and structural competency (31%); and neither or uncertain (40%). Clerkship directors reported high faculty, student, and institutional engagement in addressing systemic racism. We did not find an association between underrepresented in medicine director identity and racism curricula. Conclusions: In more than half of family medicine clerkships, systemic racism is not addressed, despite interest from students and institutional support. A higher number of hours of faculty training time on the topic of racism was associated with having a systemic racism module in the clerkship curriculum, but we lacked data to identify a causal relationship. Investments in faculty development to teach systemic racism, including discussion of structural competency, are needed.
Objective Our objective is to assess the accuracy of the COVID-19 vaccination status within the electronic health record (EHR) for a panel of patients in a primary care practice when manual queries of the state immunization databases are required to access outside immunization records. Materials and Methods This study evaluated COVID-19 vaccination status of adult primary care patients within a university-based health system EHR by manually querying the Kansas and Missouri Immunization Information Systems. Results A manual query of the local Immunization Information Systems for 4114 adult patients with “unknown” vaccination status showed 44% of the patients were previously vaccinated. Attempts to assess the comprehensiveness of the Immunization Information Systems were hampered by incomplete documentation in the chart and poor response to patient outreach. Conclusions When the interface between the patient chart and the local Immunization Information System depends on a manual query for the transfer of data, the COVID-19 vaccination status for a panel of patients is often inaccurate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.