Critical examination of "health disparities" is gaining consideration in medical schools across the United States, often as elective curricula that supplement required education. However, there is disconnect between discussions of race and disparities in these curricula and in core science courses. Specifically, required preclinical science lecturers often operationalize race as a biological concept, framing racialized disparities as inherent in bodies. A three- and five-month sampling of lecture slides at the authors' medical school demonstrated that race was almost always presented as a biological risk factor.This presentation of race as an essential component of epidemiology, risk, diagnosis, and treatment without social context is problematic, as a broad body of literature supports that race is not a robust biological category. The authors opine that current preclinical medical curricula inaccurately employ race as a definitive medical category without context, which may perpetuate misunderstanding of race as a bioscientific datum, increase bias among student-doctors, and ultimately contribute to worse patient outcomes.At the authors' institution, students approached the medical school administration with a letter addressing the current use of race, urging reform. The administration was receptive to proposals for further analysis of race in medical education and created a taskforce to examine curricular reform. Curricular changes were made as part of the construction of a longitudinal race-in-medicine curriculum. The authors seek to use their initiatives and this article to spark critical discussion on how to use teaching of race to work against racial inequality in health care.
Professional identity formation (PIF) within medical education is the multifaceted, individualized process through which students develop new ways of being in becoming physicians. Personal backgrounds, values, expectations, interests, goals, relationships, and role models can all influence PIF and may account for diversity of both experience and the active constructive process of professional formation. Guided reflection, including reflective writing, has been used to enhance awareness and meaning making within the PIF process for both students and medical educators and to shed light on what aspects of medical education are most constructive for healthy PIF. Student voices about the PIF process now emerging in the literature are often considered and interpreted by medical educators within qualitative studies or in broad theoretical overviews of PIF.In this Commentary, the authors present a chorus of individual student voices from along the medical education trajectory. Medical students (years 1-4) and a first-year resident in pediatrics respond to a variety of questions based on prevalent PIF themes extracted from the literature to reflect on their personal experiences of PIF. Topics queried included pretending in medical education, role of relationships, impact of formal and informal curricula on PIF (valuable aspects as well as suggestions for change), and navigating and developing interprofessional relationships and identities. This work aims to vividly illustrate the diverse and personal forces at play in individual students' PIF processes and to encourage future pedagogic efforts supporting healthy, integrated PIF in medical education.
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.