Colette Piasecki-Masters, Nora Newcomb, Lydia Smeltz, Valerie Bresier, Dana Rubenstein, Nethra Ankam, Margaret A Turk
{"title":"Student-Led Workshop on Disability Advocacy.","authors":"Colette Piasecki-Masters, Nora Newcomb, Lydia Smeltz, Valerie Bresier, Dana Rubenstein, Nethra Ankam, Margaret A Turk","doi":"10.1097/PHM.0000000000002465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Medical students can be powerful advocates for and in partnership with the disability community, yet opportunities for targeted advocacy training are sparse. In February 2023, a medical student-led workshop on disability advocacy for trainees took place at the Association of Academic Physiatrists' Annual Conference. The aims of this session were for trainees to (1) identify existing gaps in disability education at their institution and in policy around disability-related issues; (2) improve perceived ability to engage in disability-related education and policy-based advocacy; and (3) apply an intersectional lens to identify opportunities for intersectionality in disability advocacy. Presession and postsession responses were anonymously submitted via Qualtrics. Of 31 presurvey respondents, 18 responded to the postsurvey, and 12 were identified as having matching unique identifiers. After the workshop, participants overall were more likely to report being very/somewhat confident about their ability to identify gaps in disability education at their institution (75.0% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.011), policy around disability-related issues (41.7% vs. 100.0%, P < 0.006), and opportunities for intersectionality in disability advocacy (33.3% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.015). Participants were more likely to report being very/somewhat confident in engaging in education-based advocacy (58.3% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.006), policy-based advocacy (16.7% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.002), and intersectional disability advocacy (41.7% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.006). All attendees strongly/somewhat agreed with the statements \"I hope that this session will continue in future years\" and \"I think that other trainees would benefit from a similar course.\" This session was shown to effectively meet the intended goals of the program.</p>","PeriodicalId":7850,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"e141-e144"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11366036/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000002465","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract: Medical students can be powerful advocates for and in partnership with the disability community, yet opportunities for targeted advocacy training are sparse. In February 2023, a medical student-led workshop on disability advocacy for trainees took place at the Association of Academic Physiatrists' Annual Conference. The aims of this session were for trainees to (1) identify existing gaps in disability education at their institution and in policy around disability-related issues; (2) improve perceived ability to engage in disability-related education and policy-based advocacy; and (3) apply an intersectional lens to identify opportunities for intersectionality in disability advocacy. Presession and postsession responses were anonymously submitted via Qualtrics. Of 31 presurvey respondents, 18 responded to the postsurvey, and 12 were identified as having matching unique identifiers. After the workshop, participants overall were more likely to report being very/somewhat confident about their ability to identify gaps in disability education at their institution (75.0% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.011), policy around disability-related issues (41.7% vs. 100.0%, P < 0.006), and opportunities for intersectionality in disability advocacy (33.3% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.015). Participants were more likely to report being very/somewhat confident in engaging in education-based advocacy (58.3% vs. 100.0%, P = 0.006), policy-based advocacy (16.7% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.002), and intersectional disability advocacy (41.7% vs. 91.7%, P < 0.006). All attendees strongly/somewhat agreed with the statements "I hope that this session will continue in future years" and "I think that other trainees would benefit from a similar course." This session was shown to effectively meet the intended goals of the program.
期刊介绍:
American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation focuses on the practice, research and educational aspects of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Monthly issues keep physiatrists up-to-date on the optimal functional restoration of patients with disabilities, physical treatment of neuromuscular impairments, the development of new rehabilitative technologies, and the use of electrodiagnostic studies. The Journal publishes cutting-edge basic and clinical research, clinical case reports and in-depth topical reviews of interest to rehabilitation professionals.
Topics include prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal conditions, brain injury, spinal cord injury, cardiopulmonary disease, trauma, acute and chronic pain, amputation, prosthetics and orthotics, mobility, gait, and pediatrics as well as areas related to education and administration. Other important areas of interest include cancer rehabilitation, aging, and exercise. The Journal has recently published a series of articles on the topic of outcomes research. This well-established journal is the official scholarly publication of the Association of Academic Physiatrists (AAP).