ObjectiveTo investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the research activity and working experience of clinical academics, with a focus on gender and ethnicity.DesignQualitative study based on interviews and audio/written diary data.SettingUK study within clinical academia.ParticipantsPurposive sample of 82 clinical academics working in medicine and dentistry across all career stages ranging from academic clinical fellows and doctoral candidates to professors.MethodsQualitative semistructured interviews (n=68) and audio diary data (n=30; including 16 participants who were also interviewed) collected over an 8-month period (January–September 2020), thematically analysed.Results20 of 30 (66.6%) audio diary contributors and 40 of 68 (58.8%) interview participants were female. Of the participants who disclosed ethnicity, 5 of 29 (17.2%) audio diary contributors and 19/66 (28.8%) interview participants identified as Black, Asian or another minority (BAME). Four major themes were identified in relation to the initial impact of COVID-19 on clinical academics: opportunities, barriers, personal characteristics and social identity, and fears and uncertainty. COVID-19 presented opportunities for new avenues of research. Barriers included access to resources to conduct research and the increasing teaching demands. One of the most prominent subthemes within ‘personal characteristics’ was that of the perceived negative impact of the pandemic on the work of female clinical academics. This was attributed to inequalities experienced in relation to childcare provision and research capacity. Participants described differential experiences based upon their gender and ethnicity, noting intersectional identities.ConclusionsWhile there have been some positives afforded to clinical academics, particularly for new avenues of research, COVID-19 has negatively impacted workload, future career intentions and mental health. BAME academics were particularly fearful due to the differential impact on health. Our study elucidates the direct and systemic discrimination that creates barriers to women’s career trajectories in clinical academia. A flexible, strategic response that supports clinical academics in resuming their training and research is required. Interventions are needed to mitigate the potential lasting impact on capacity from the pandemic, and the potential for the loss of women from this valuable workforce.

Background:  Workers in the field of child health appear to be presented with increasing numbers of young people who exhibit behaviours that pose a potential or actual risk to the safety of others. Method:  A review of the current literature on the assessment and management of these children and adolescents was conducted. Results:  A history taking check‐list has been devised on the basis of what is known about current associations with background and current factors and violent acts directed to others. There is emerging evidence of interventions that may be effective in reducing long‐term risks in such youths. However, these are often resource intensive and may be less effective in older children and adolescents. Conclusions:  Faced with the challenge of assessing and managing severely conduct disordered children, child and family mental health teams should develop formalised assessment procedures and protocols for managing risk factors in a multi‐agency context.

This study examined the relations between callous-unemotional traits and perpetration of aggression toward parents in two separate studies, while also considering motivation for aggression and parenting styles experienced among young people. Study 1 involved 60 parents of children aged between 11 and 17 years old. The online study found high callous-unemotional traits, as reported by parents, to be associated with aggression toward both parents. Both types of motivation (proactive and reactive, as reported by parents) were associated with aggression toward parents. Study 2 involved 42 youths from an alternative education sample (between 11 and 16 years old). Youths with higher self-reported callous-unemotional traits reported more aggression toward both parents. Both studies, which had different reporters and different samples, showed youths with higher callous-unemotional traits were more aggressive toward their parents. In discussing the results, we note the importance of including callous-unemotional traits in future research on parent-directed aggression and in studies on domestic violence more broadly.

Introduction & Objective Anatomy outreach programs are descriptively and anecdotally a prominent feature of the anatomy education community. However, the overarching phenomena of such outreach, and why so many anatomists contribute to its facilitation, has never been explored. Further, in light of the massive societal and educational changes as a result of the coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic, understanding the perspectives of anatomy ‘outreachers’ is now more important than ever, if we are to continue to support these initiatives. Thus, this work sought to explore the phenomena of anatomy outreach, from the perspective of anatomist facilitators, and more specifically, explore views on the effects of COVID‐19 on this activity. Materials & Methods This ethics‐approved, qualitative study employed grounded theory (GT) as a methodology to understand the phenomena of anatomy outreach, from the perspective of anatomist facilitators. A component of the inquiry included participant views on the impact of COVID‐19 on anatomy‐related outreach. Purposive sampling was used to recruit anatomists with experience of facilitating anatomy‐specific outreach. Semi‐structured, virtual interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Following in constructivist‐style GT, data were coded with constant comparison and concurrent data collection until theoretical sensitivity was reached. Analysis included cycles of initial, focused, and theoretical coding. This produced a conceptual model that considers COVID‐19 disruptions to anatomy outreach. Results Eighteen participants completed interviews, representing a range of educational levels and global locations. The pandemic affected nearly every aspect of anatomy outreach. Sub‐categories of coding for disruption included: near‐complete halt of anatomy outreach, concerns about general academic disruptions, and recognition of wider societal disruptions for the target populations. Being in educational “survival mode” led to outreach not being prioritized. Beyond disruptions, participants reflected on the sub‐category of ‘pivoting’ such activities to be conducted virtually, though many posited that this may result in the loss of the “outreach feel.” This included codes for loss of multimodal engagement and social elements with virtual pivoting. Lastly, anatomists shared reflections on how the pandemic highlighted the importance of anatomy outreach, and the increased ‘duty’ felt for anatomists to generate scientific and anatomical literacy. Conclusion Most anatomy outreach halted as a result of COVID‐19, and anatomists are divided on the possibilities of virtual pivoting, or their ability to sustain outreach work in the current climate. Yet, ‘outreachers’ believe the general public of the world could arguably benefit from better anatomical literacy now more than ever. Significance If anatomists are to continue to support outreach goals, there needs to be more generalizable, evidence‐based understanding of such activities. In the midst of a pandemic, it is especially important to un...