Physician advocacy and leadership is increasingly recognized as an important part of our social responsibility. Frameworks, such as CanMEDS, have set out definitions of health advocacy and leadership for medical education. Despite calls for mandatory advocacy and leadership teaching and potential wellness benefits, presently medical curricula do not usually teach practical advocacy and leadership skills to learners. There is also a demonstrated disconnect between staff and resident perceptions of advocacy. Our group set out to create an innovative Advocacy and Leadership Curriculum (ALC) to fill this gap. A collaboration of over twenty medical students and professors from across Canada and the U.S worked over the past year to survey students, conduct curriculum mapping, Page | 2 examine current literature and practices in order to inform the creation of an ALC. A competency-and milestonebased ALC was created based on this data and reviewed by experts in medical education and/or physician advocacy. This ALC addresses three spheres of advocacy: the Patient level, the Institutional level, and the Population level (which includes the Community). A guiding principle of the ALC is to form positive working partnerships with communities and patients and to collaborate with other health professionals to advocate with, and on behalf of, patients. CanMEDS-based Learning Objectives, divided into theoretical, skills-based, and application-based categories, form the core of the program. The curriculum prepares learners for real-world advocacy through longitudinal projects, interdisciplinary work, and community-based service learning. Novel engagement of other professionals and physician advocates to act as advocacy preceptors is central to the curriculum. Innovative assessment techniques-such as advocacy simulations, longitudinal study of physician advocacy activity, and focus on attitudes and behaviour as well as knowledge and practical advocacy skills-are introduced. The ALC serves as an adaptable model for the training of socially responsible medical learners who are conversant in advocacy techniques and able to advocate with patients, within institutions, and with populations. Projects resulting from the ALC will improve medical school social accountability.

During the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the 1980s, most of the developed world instituted a permanent ban on blood donations from men who have sex with men (MSM). In recent years, public health agencies across Europe and North America are reconsidering and rescinding these restrictions. We examine the Canadian climate, where MSM may donate blood only after a 5-year deferral period. We review circumstances of the initial ban on MSM blood donations and recent social, legal, and economic changes that have encouraged Canadian public health officials to consider policy reform. We also review international evidence about the impact of reforming MSM blood donations. Given improvements in HIV screening technology, results from mathematical modeling studies, and empirical data from Italy, the UK, and Australia, we conclude that changing Canada's MSM blood donation policy from a 5- to a 1-year deferral would not increase the number of transfusion-transmitted HIV infections. We provide empirical support to the recently elected Liberal Canadian government's political promise to decrease restrictions on MSM blood donations.

Objective The Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) has developed a clinical-decision instrument (CDI) to identify children at very low risk of intra-abdominal injury. However, the CDI has not been externally validated. We sought to vet the PECARN CDI with the Predictability Computability Stability (PCS) data science framework, potentially increasing its chance of a successful external validation. Materials & methods We performed a secondary analysis of two prospectively collected datasets: PECARN (12,044 children from 20 emergency departments) and an independent external validation dataset from the Pediatric Surgical Research Collaborative (PedSRC; 2,188 children from 14 emergency departments). We used PCS to reanalyze the original PECARN CDI along with new interpretable PCS CDIs developed using the PECARN dataset. External validation was then measured on the PedSRC dataset. Results Three predictor variables (abdominal wall trauma, Glasgow Coma Scale Score <14, and abdominal tenderness) were found to be stable. A CDI using only these three variables would achieve lower sensitivity than the original PECARN CDI with seven variables on internal PECARN validation but achieve the same performance on external PedSRC validation (sensitivity 96.8% and specificity 44%). Using only these variables, we developed a PCS CDI which had a lower sensitivity than the original PECARN CDI on internal PECARN validation but performed the same on external PedSRC validation (sensitivity 96.8% and specificity 44%). Conclusion The PCS data science framework vetted the PECARN CDI and its constituent predictor variables prior to external validation. We found that the 3 stable predictor variables represented all of the PECARN CDI’s predictive performance on independent external validation. The PCS framework offers a less resource-intensive method than prospective validation to vet CDIs before external validation. We also found that the PECARN CDI will generalize well to new populations and should be prospectively externally validated. The PCS framework offers a potential strategy to increase the chance of a successful (costly) prospective validation.

ObjectiveThe Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) has developed a clinical-decision instrument (CDI) to identify children at very low risk of intra-abdominal injury. However, the CDI has not been externally validated. We sought to vet the PECARN CDI with the Predictability Computability Stability (PCS) data science framework, potentially increasing its chance of a successful external validation.Materials & MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of two prospectively collected datasets: PECARN (12,044 children from 20 emergency departments) and an independent external validation dataset from the Pediatric Surgical Research Collaborative (PedSRC; 2,188 children from 14 emergency departments). We used PCS to reanalyze the original PECARN CDI along with new interpretable PCS CDIs we developed using the PECARN dataset. External validation was then measured on the PedSRC dataset.ResultsThree predictor variables (abdominal wall trauma, Glasgow Coma Scale Score <14, and abdominal tenderness) were found to be stable. Using only these variables, we developed a PCS CDI which had a lower sensitivity than the original PECARN CDI on internal PECARN validation but performed the same on external PedSRC validation (sensitivity 96.8% and specificity 44%).ConclusionThe PCS data science framework vetted the PECARN CDI and its constituent predictor variables prior to external validation. In this case, the PECARN CDI with 7 predictors, and our PCS-based CDI with 3 stable predictors, had identical performance on independent external validation. This suggests that both CDIs will generalize well to new populations, offering a potential strategy to increase the chance of a successful (costly) prospective validation.

No abstract