How can contextualized feedback on therapy practices and youth outcomes promote an evidence-based culture for adolescent mental health? Relative to other quality improvement tools, feedback and progress monitoring systems are generally underutilized. This article describes a feedback system collaboratively developed by the Hawaiʻi Department of Health Child and Adolescent Mental Health Division and private agency staff contracted to provide mental health services to youth. Feedback reports allow providers to monitor progress of their youth clients, compare their progress with youth receiving similar services, examine the extent they are using practices derived from evidence-based protocols, and compare these practice profiles to what other youth are receiving. Providers gather to discuss reports, share success stories, and offer suggestions to improve practices and outcomes based on data from the reports. The provider feedback system in Hawaiʻi has emphasized youth outcomes and has promoted an “evidence-based culture.” This article encourages direct providers and supervisors to consider how such a system might fit in their current practice and whether contextualized feedback might be one way to enhance services and outcomes for youth with mental health needs.

Background Academic medicine needs more diverse leadership from racial/ethnic minorities, women, people with disabilities, and LGBTQIA+ physicians. Longitudinal structural support programs that bring together underrepresented in medicine (UiM) and non-UiM trainees are one approach to build leadership and scholarship capacity in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Objective To describe the creation, satisfaction with, and feasibility of a Leadership Education in Advancing Diversity (LEAD) Program and evaluate scholars' changes in self-efficacy, intended and actual behavior change, and outputs in leadership and DEI scholarship. Methods In 2017, we created the LEAD Program, a 10-month longitudinal, single institution program that provides residents and fellows (“scholars”) across graduate medical education (GME) with leadership training and mentorship in creating DEI-focused scholarship. In the first 3 cohorts (2017–2020), we assessed scholars' self-efficacy, actual and planned behavior change, and program satisfaction using IRB-approved, de-identified retrospective pre-/post-surveys. We measured scholarship as the number of workshops presented and publications developed by the LEAD scholars. We used descriptive statistics and paired 2-tailed t tests to analyze the data. Results Seventy-five trainees completed LEAD; 99% (74 of 75) completed the retrospective pre-/post-surveys. There was statistically significant improvement in scholars' self-efficacy for all learning objectives. All trainees thought LEAD should continue. LEAD scholars have created workshops and presented at local, regional, and national conferences, as well published their findings. Scholars identified the greatest benefits as mentorship, developing friendships with UiM and ally peers outside of their subspecialty, and confidence in public speaking. Conclusions LEAD is an innovative, feasible GME-wide model to improve resident and fellow self-efficacy and behaviors in DEI scholarship and leadership.

No abstract

No abstract