Is the Future Green? Assessing Environmental Health Confidence in Internal Medicine Residents.

Journal of graduate medical education Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-13 DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-24-00081.1
Jessica Y Chambers, Jillian Rippon, Daniel Ahle, Xavier Le, Beth Miller, Alejandro Moreno
{"title":"Is the Future Green? Assessing Environmental Health Confidence in Internal Medicine Residents.","authors":"Jessica Y Chambers, Jillian Rippon, Daniel Ahle, Xavier Le, Beth Miller, Alejandro Moreno","doi":"10.4300/JGME-D-24-00081.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b> Despite global awareness of the impacts of climate change on human health, assessment of resident physicians' confidence in environmental health is limited. Lack of confidence in explaining environmental health topics can affect both patient education and advocacy efforts. <b>Objective</b> To determine how confident resident physicians are in their environmental health training and their ability to explain climate health topics. <b>Methods</b> An online survey was distributed to internal medicine residents at a large university-affiliated program in 2023. Self-perceived confidence levels in explaining various environmental health topics to a peer were measured using a Likert scale (from 1=not confident at all, to 5=completely confident) and a subsequent rank-order analysis of the response means. <b>Results</b> The response rate was 56% (62 out of 110 residents). A mean confidence score of 2.22 was reported on all topics, with hazardous waste (m=1.73), endocrine disruptors (m=1.76), water quality (m=1.9), toxicology (m=2.02), and environmental justice (m=2.04) representing lowest scores. Highest mean scores were reported in food security (m=2.71) and emerging infectious disease (m=2.92). Twenty-seven of 62 (44%) residents reported no confidence at all in their ability to discuss environmental justice concepts, with 17 of 62 (27%) reporting slight confidence in doing so. <b>Conclusions</b> Physician trainees report low confidence levels regarding their ability to explain multiple environmental topics to their peers. Forty-four of 62 (71%) residents report either no or slight confidence in their ability to explain environmental justice to a colleague.</p>","PeriodicalId":37886,"journal":{"name":"Journal of graduate medical education","volume":"16 6 Suppl","pages":"99-103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11644584/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of graduate medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-24-00081.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Despite global awareness of the impacts of climate change on human health, assessment of resident physicians' confidence in environmental health is limited. Lack of confidence in explaining environmental health topics can affect both patient education and advocacy efforts. Objective To determine how confident resident physicians are in their environmental health training and their ability to explain climate health topics. Methods An online survey was distributed to internal medicine residents at a large university-affiliated program in 2023. Self-perceived confidence levels in explaining various environmental health topics to a peer were measured using a Likert scale (from 1=not confident at all, to 5=completely confident) and a subsequent rank-order analysis of the response means. Results The response rate was 56% (62 out of 110 residents). A mean confidence score of 2.22 was reported on all topics, with hazardous waste (m=1.73), endocrine disruptors (m=1.76), water quality (m=1.9), toxicology (m=2.02), and environmental justice (m=2.04) representing lowest scores. Highest mean scores were reported in food security (m=2.71) and emerging infectious disease (m=2.92). Twenty-seven of 62 (44%) residents reported no confidence at all in their ability to discuss environmental justice concepts, with 17 of 62 (27%) reporting slight confidence in doing so. Conclusions Physician trainees report low confidence levels regarding their ability to explain multiple environmental topics to their peers. Forty-four of 62 (71%) residents report either no or slight confidence in their ability to explain environmental justice to a colleague.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
未来是绿色的吗?评估内科住院医生对环境健康的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of graduate medical education
Journal of graduate medical education Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
248
期刊介绍: - Be the leading peer-reviewed journal in graduate medical education; - Promote scholarship and enhance the quality of research in the field; - Disseminate evidence-based approaches for teaching, assessment, and improving the learning environment; and - Generate new knowledge that enhances graduates'' ability to provide high-quality, cost-effective care.
期刊最新文献
A Residency Elective in Sustainable Health Care. Adapting the Planetary Health Report Card for Graduate Medical Training Programs. An Interprofessional Approach to Prepare Medical Residents and Fellows to Address Climate- and Environment-Related Health Risks. Assessing Physician Climate Change Competency via Medical Licensing and Board Examinations: Lessons From Integrating Ultrasound Topics in Emergency Medicine. Climate Change Curriculum in a Network of US Family Medicine Residency Programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1