Introduction Health profession schools have acknowledged the need for a diverse workforce by increasing diversity in recruitment, but little has been done to build inclusive excellence in learning environments. Microaggressions and other forms of mistreatment can increase stress levels and depression and negatively impact academic performance. To increase student performance, retention, and wellness, mitigating microaggressions is needed to promote an inclusive culture. Methods We designed this workshop as a framework to think critically about microaggressions, how they impact the health professions academic environment, and how administrators, faculty, and students can promote inclusion excellence. The workshop included a presentation discussing microaggression theory, seven cases describing microaggressions in the health professions education environment, and discussion and facilitator guides. Cases were based on prior research conducted by the primary author and upon interactions authors shared from their professional experience. Participants completed pre- and postsurveys. Results During six workshops at three different institutions, 138 out of 190 participants (73% response rate), including nursing and medicine faculty, students, and leadership, completed the pre- and postsurveys. Pre- and posttraining measurements found statistically significant improvements in participants' knowledge of the impact of microaggressions, self-efficacy in responding to microaggressions, and commitment to being an active bystander in the face of microaggressions. Participants were highly satisfied with the training. Discussion This humanistic, case-based learning curriculum allows facilitators to guide faculty, student, and leadership conversations to build skills to promote inclusion excellence through preventing microaggressions, repairing and reestablishing relationships, and restoring reputations once microaggressions occur.

ImportanceClosing the diversity gap is critical to ensure equity in medical education and health care quality. Nevertheless, evidence-based strategies and best practices to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the biomedical workforce remain poorly understood and underused. To improve the culture of DEI in graduate medical education (GME), in 2020 the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) launched the Barbara Ross-Lee, DO, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Award to recognize exceptional DEI efforts in US residency programs.ObjectiveTo identify strategies and best practices that exemplary US GME programs use to improve DEI.Design and SettingThis qualitative study performed an exploratory content analysis of award applications submitted to the ACGME over 2 cycles in 2020 and 2021, using the constant comparative method. The research team first acknowledged their own biases related to DEI, used caution to not overinterpret the data, and performed several cross-checks during data analysis to ensure confirmability of the results. A preliminary codebook was developed and used during regular adjudication sessions. Disagreements were discussed until agreements were reached.Main Outcomes and MeasuresFoundational (ie, commonly cited, high-impact, and small-effort strategies considered achievable by all programs) and aspirational (ie, potential for high impact but requiring greater effort and investment) DEI strategies used by exemplary GME programs.ResultsThis qualitative study included 29 award applications submitted between August 17, 2020, and January 11, 2022. Strategies spanned the education continuum from premedical students through faculty. Foundational strategies included working with schools, community colleges, and 4-year college campuses; providing structured support for visiting students; mission-driven holistic review for admissions and selection; interviewer trainings on implicit bias mitigation and on how racism and discrimination impact admission processes and advancement; interview-day DEI strategies; inclusive selection and DEI committees; mission statements that include DEI; and retention efforts to improve faculty diversity. Aspirational strategies included development of longitudinal bidirectional collaborations (eg, articulation agreements, annual workshops, funded rotations and/or research) with organizations working with applicants who were historically excluded and underrepresented in medicine, blinding metrics in residency applications, longitudinal curricula on DEI and health equity, and faculty mentoring such as affinity groups, mentored research, and joint academic-community recruitments. Findings provide residency program leadership with a menu of options at various inflection points to foster DEI within their programs.Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings of this qualitative study suggest that GME programs might adopt strategies of exemplary programs to improve DEI in residency, ensure compliance with accreditation standards, and improve health outcomes for all.

ImportanceDespite decades-long calls for increasing racial and ethnic diversity, the medical profession continues to exclude members of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, and Indigenous groups.ObjectiveTo describe US medical school admissions leaders’ experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis qualitative study involved key-informant interviews of 39 deans and directors of admission from 37 US allopathic medical schools across the range of student body racial and ethnic composition. Interviews were conducted in person and online from October 16, 2019, to March 27, 2020, and analyzed from October 2019 to March 2021.Main Outcomes and MeasuresParticipant experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion.ResultsAmong 39 participants from 37 medical schools, admissions experience ranged from 1 to 40 years. Overall, 56.4% of participants identified as women, 10.3% as Asian American, 25.6% as Black or African American, 5.1% as Hispanic or Latinx, and 61.5% as White (participants could report >1 race and/or ethnicity). Participants characterized diversity broadly, with limited attention to racial injustice. Barriers to advancing racial and ethnic diversity included lack of leadership commitment; pressure from faculty and administrators to overemphasize academic scores and school rankings; and political and social influences, such as donors and alumni. Accreditation requirements, holistic review initiatives, and local policy motivated reforms but may also have inadvertently lowered expectations and accountability. Strategies to overcome challenges included narrative change and revision of school leadership structure, admissions goals, practices, and committee membership.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this qualitative study, admissions leaders characterized the ways in which entrenched beliefs, practices, and power structures in medical schools may perpetuate institutional racism, with far-reaching implications for health equity. Participants offered insights on how to remove inequitable structures and implement process changes. Without such action, calls for racial justice will likely remain performative, and racism across health care institutions will continue.

No abstract

Purpose: Increasing diversity in the physician assistant (PA) workforce has been identified as a key priority by national PA organizations and PA programs alike. This study aimed to understand why certain applicants did not progress in PA program admissions by exploring common reasons for nonprogression and identifying any demographic trends.Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of applicants over the last 5 consecutive admission cycles at the University of California Davis Physician Assistant program. Results:The most common reasons for denial, starting with the most prevalent, were low application score, bachelor's GPA <3.0, missing prerequisite(s), late application, and science GPA <2.7. Several associations between demographic groups and reasons for nonprogression were identified. Conclusions:The findings from a multicohort study might help programs consider these issues in their own programs and identify interventions to support underrepresented applicants.