Improving the recruitment, retention, and leadership advancement of faculty who are under-represented in medicine is a priority at many academic institutions to ensure excellence in patient care, research, and health equity. Here we provide a critical review of the literature and offer evidence-based guidelines for faculty recruitment, retention, and representation in leadership. Recommendations for recruitment include targeted recruitment to expand the candidate pool with diverse candidates, holistic review of applications, and incentivizing stakeholders for success with diversity efforts. Retention efforts should establish a culture of inclusivity, promote faculty develop-ment, and evaluate for biases in the promotion and tenure process. We believe this guide will be valuable for all leaders and faculty members seeking to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in their institutions.

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist.

Advancement of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in emergency medicine can only occur with intentional recruitment of residency applicants underrepresented in medicine (UIM). Shared experiences from undergraduate and graduate medical education highlight considerations and practices that can contribute to improved diversity in the resident pool, such as holistic review and mitigating bias in the recruitment process. This review, written by members of the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) Best Practices Subcommittee, offers best practice recommendations for the recruitment of UIM applicants. Recommendations address pre-interview readiness, interview approach, and post-interview strategies that residency leadership may use to implement holistic review and mitigate bias for recruitment of a diverse class.

BACKGROUND Emergency medicine (EM) is a dynamic specialty that requires not only an acquisition of vast amounts of medical knowledge, but also the ability to prioritize and task switch efficiently and effectively to combat the chaos, high patient volume, and variable acuity within a given shift. Additionally, mounting pressures are placed on EM faculty to use less time to care for a larger volume of patients while increasing patient satisfaction scores, documentation, billing, and academic productivity. 1,2 All of these factors can make the emergency department (ED) a challenging environment for clinical

No abstract

The competency frameworks that describe physician abilities in North America presume that most physicians who have completed residency training have acquired the necessary skills to function as an educator, leader, and scholar. 1,2 However, the sophistication of practice required of new faculty members to succeed in academic roles typically exceeds the foundational abilities acquired during residency training.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires residency programs to prepare residents to teach and assess medical students and other learners. In order to achieve this, many programs develop formal residents as teachers (RAT) curricula. Medical educators may seek the guidance of previously published literature during the development of RAT programs at their institutions.The authors sought to identify key articles published on the subject of RAT programs over the last 10 years. The authors utilized a formal literature search with the help of a medical librarian and identified additional articles from virtual discussions among the author group and an open call for articles on Twitter using the hashtag #MedEd. Virtual discussions occurred within an online community of practice, the Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator. The lead author conducted a four-round modified Delphi process among the author group in order to narrow the broad article list to five key articles on RAT programs. The authors summarize each article and provide considerations for junior faculty as well as faculty developers.Curriculum development and program evaluation should utilize established frameworks and evidence-based approaches. The papers identified by this Delphi process will help faculty use best practices when creating or revising new RAT curriculum. In addition, faculty tasked with guiding junior faculty in this process or creating faculty development programs around curriculum development will find these articles to be a great resource for building content.

Feedback is an essential part of learning, growth, and academic success. Junior faculty members are often unfamiliar with the grounding literature that defines feedback. Many times they receive little education on providing and receiving feedback, resulting in unhelpful “feedback” for both learners and program leadership alike. This article aims to summarize eight key papers on feedback, to outline relevant information for emerging clinician educators, and identify ways to use these resources for the faculty development. In order to generate a list of key papers that describes the importance and significance of feedback, the authors conducted a consensus-building process to identify the top papers. In August and September, 2018, the 2018-2019 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program discussed the topic of feedback in medical education. A number of papers on the topic was highlighted. This list of papers was further augmented using the suggestions and expertise of guest experts who are leaders in the field of medical education and feedback. The authors also used social media to conduct an open call on Twitter for important papers regarding feedback (utilizing #meded, #Feedback hashtags). Via this process, a list of 88 key papers was identified on the topic of feedback in medical education. After compiling these papers, the authorship group engaged in a modified Delphi approach to build consensus on the top eight papers on feedback. These papers were deemed essential by the authors and have been summarized with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers. In this manuscript, we present eight key papers addressing feedback in medical education with discussions and applications for junior faculty members and faculty developers. This list of articles that can serve to help junior clinician educators grow in their ability to give effective feedback and also serve as resources upon which senior faculty can design the faculty development sessions.