Purpose The education of health care professionals is a contributing factor to persistent health disparities. Although medical students are expected to understand racism, classism, and other social and structural drivers of health (SDH), standardization and best practices for teaching these concepts are lacking. Some medical schools are adopting social justice curricula (SJC) that prioritize health equity in teaching students to recognize SDH and preparing them to address the consequent health disparities. This systematic review sought to evaluate how these schools have integrated SJC into their core teaching; the criteria they have used to measure success and to what extent these criteria are met; and best practices in planning, implementing, and evaluating SJC. Method The authors searched 7 databases for English-language studies published between January 2000 and April 2020, reporting on longitudinally integrated SJC at U.S. medical schools intended for all students. Quantitative and qualitative outcomes were synthesized and summarized. Results Searches identified 3,137 articles, of which 11 met inclusion criteria. Results demonstrated schools use a variety of teaching methods over a wide range of didactic hours to teach SJC concepts. Surveys and objective tests indicated students in SJC are generally satisfied and demonstrated improved knowledge and skills related to understanding and mitigating SDH, although findings related to changes in attitudes were equivocal. Evaluations at graduation and in residency demonstrated students who experience SJC are more prepared than their peers to work with patients who are underserved. Best practices in SJC included addressing the hidden curriculum, considering medical mistrust, and using tools like the Racial Justice Report Card and Tool for Assessing Cultural Competence Training. Conclusions These findings indicated SJC can prepare students to better address the root causes of health disparities. Future research should consider the long-term influences of these curricula on students, patients, and the community.

Background and Objectives: Women have increased in presence within academic family medicine over time yet remain underrepresented among senior faculty. Mentorship is a mechanism by which senior faculty support scholarly achievements, accelerating advancement of junior faculty. Methods: We analyzed 10 years (2008-2017) of original research articles in three peer-reviewed family medicine journals. We examined first author/last author pairs by gender as a proxy for mentorship of junior faculty by senior faculty. We compiled family medicine faculty data across 9 years to compare trends in scholarly mentorship with faculty advancement. Results: Female last authorship increased from 28.8% (55/191) of original research articles with a first and last author in 2008 to 41.8% (94/225) in 2017. The share of female first authors on articles with a female last author was 56.4% in 2008 and 2017. The share of female first authors on articles with a male last author increased from 41.2% (56/136) to 55.7% (73/131) between 2008 and 2017. From 2009-2017, the proportion of women increased for assistant, associate, and full professor roles, but remained under 50% for the associate professor role and at 35% for professorship in 2017. Conclusions: Despite disproportionate rates of last authorship and senior faculty positions in family medicine departments, senior female authors have equal if not greater rates of mentorship of female first authors in family medicine literature. The increase in first authorship, last authorship, and faculty position indicates that improvements have occurred in gender advancement over the study period, but gains are still needed to improve gender equity within the field.

No abstract