美国医学院能教授结构性种族主义吗?

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Milbank Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-20 DOI:10.1111/1468-0009.12650
Anthony L Schlaff, Ndidiamaka N Amutah-Onukagha, Dorcas Mabiala, Jasmin Kamruddin, Fernando F Ona
{"title":"美国医学院能教授结构性种族主义吗?","authors":"Anthony L Schlaff, Ndidiamaka N Amutah-Onukagha, Dorcas Mabiala, Jasmin Kamruddin, Fernando F Ona","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.12650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy Points There need to be sweeping changes to medical school curricula that addresses structural racism in medicine and how to attend to this in medical practice. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education should develop and promulgate specific learning objectives and curricular offerings that require medical schools to teach about structural racism and antiracist medical practice in ways that are robust and standardized. The federal government, through the Health Resources and Services Administration, should prioritize support for antiracism education in medical schools, residency, and continuing medical education in similar ways and with similar effort in scale and scope to its support for primary care, providing technical assistance and grants for programs across the educational spectrum that provide antiracist training. State governments should mandate, as part of continuing education requirements for physicians, 2 or more hours per recertification cycle of antiracist training.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Since the beginning of COVID-19 and the rise of social justice movements sparked by the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor in the summer of 2020, many medical schools have made public statements committing themselves to become antiracist institutions. The notions that US society generally, and medicine, are rife with structural racism no longer seems as controversial in the academic community. Challenges remain, however, in how this basic understanding gets translated into medical education practice. Understanding where the profession must go should start with understanding where we currently are.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prior to the events of 2020, in the spring of 2018, we conducted nine key informant interviews to learn about the challenges and best practices from schools deemed to be positive deviants in teaching about structural racism.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our interviews showed that even those schools deemed positive deviants in the amount of teaching done about structural racism faced significant barriers in providing a robust education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant structural change, perhaps far beyond what most schools consider themselves willing and able to engage in, will be necessary if future US physicians are to fully understand and address structural racism as it affects their profession, their practice, and their patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":49810,"journal":{"name":"Milbank Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"975-998"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10509511/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can US Medical Schools Teach About Structural Racism?\",\"authors\":\"Anthony L Schlaff, Ndidiamaka N Amutah-Onukagha, Dorcas Mabiala, Jasmin Kamruddin, Fernando F Ona\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-0009.12650\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Policy Points There need to be sweeping changes to medical school curricula that addresses structural racism in medicine and how to attend to this in medical practice. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education should develop and promulgate specific learning objectives and curricular offerings that require medical schools to teach about structural racism and antiracist medical practice in ways that are robust and standardized. The federal government, through the Health Resources and Services Administration, should prioritize support for antiracism education in medical schools, residency, and continuing medical education in similar ways and with similar effort in scale and scope to its support for primary care, providing technical assistance and grants for programs across the educational spectrum that provide antiracist training. State governments should mandate, as part of continuing education requirements for physicians, 2 or more hours per recertification cycle of antiracist training.</p><p><strong>Context: </strong>Since the beginning of COVID-19 and the rise of social justice movements sparked by the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor in the summer of 2020, many medical schools have made public statements committing themselves to become antiracist institutions. The notions that US society generally, and medicine, are rife with structural racism no longer seems as controversial in the academic community. Challenges remain, however, in how this basic understanding gets translated into medical education practice. Understanding where the profession must go should start with understanding where we currently are.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prior to the events of 2020, in the spring of 2018, we conducted nine key informant interviews to learn about the challenges and best practices from schools deemed to be positive deviants in teaching about structural racism.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our interviews showed that even those schools deemed positive deviants in the amount of teaching done about structural racism faced significant barriers in providing a robust education.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant structural change, perhaps far beyond what most schools consider themselves willing and able to engage in, will be necessary if future US physicians are to fully understand and address structural racism as it affects their profession, their practice, and their patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Milbank Quarterly\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"975-998\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10509511/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Milbank Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12650\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Milbank Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12650","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

政策要点需要对医学院课程进行全面改革,解决医学中的结构性种族主义问题,以及如何在医学实践中解决这一问题。医学教育联络委员会应制定和颁布具体的学习目标和课程设置,要求医学院以强有力和标准化的方式教授结构性种族主义和反种族主义医学实践。联邦政府应通过卫生资源和服务管理局,优先支持医学院、住院医师和继续医学教育中的反种族主义教育,其方式和力度与支持初级保健、,为提供反种族主义培训的教育领域的项目提供技术援助和资助。作为医生继续教育要求的一部分,州政府应强制要求每个重新认证周期进行2小时或2小时以上的反种族主义培训。背景:自新冠肺炎开始以及2020年夏天乔治·弗洛伊德和布伦娜·泰勒谋杀案引发的社会正义运动兴起以来,许多医学院都发表了公开声明,承诺成为反种族主义机构。美国社会和医学普遍充斥着结构性种族主义的观念在学术界似乎不再那么有争议。然而,如何将这一基本理解转化为医学教育实践仍然存在挑战。了解这个职业必须走向何方,应该从了解我们目前所处的位置开始。方法:在2020年事件之前,即2018年春天,我们进行了九次关键的线人访谈,以了解被认为是结构性种族主义教学中积极离经叛道者的学校面临的挑战和最佳做法。调查结果:我们的采访显示,即使是那些在关于结构性种族主义的教学量上被视为积极偏差的学校,在提供强有力的教育方面也面临着重大障碍。结论:如果未来的美国医生要充分理解和解决结构性种族主义对他们的职业、执业和患者的影响,就必须进行重大的结构性变革,这可能远远超出大多数学校认为自己愿意和能够参与的范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Can US Medical Schools Teach About Structural Racism?

Policy Points There need to be sweeping changes to medical school curricula that addresses structural racism in medicine and how to attend to this in medical practice. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education should develop and promulgate specific learning objectives and curricular offerings that require medical schools to teach about structural racism and antiracist medical practice in ways that are robust and standardized. The federal government, through the Health Resources and Services Administration, should prioritize support for antiracism education in medical schools, residency, and continuing medical education in similar ways and with similar effort in scale and scope to its support for primary care, providing technical assistance and grants for programs across the educational spectrum that provide antiracist training. State governments should mandate, as part of continuing education requirements for physicians, 2 or more hours per recertification cycle of antiracist training.

Context: Since the beginning of COVID-19 and the rise of social justice movements sparked by the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor in the summer of 2020, many medical schools have made public statements committing themselves to become antiracist institutions. The notions that US society generally, and medicine, are rife with structural racism no longer seems as controversial in the academic community. Challenges remain, however, in how this basic understanding gets translated into medical education practice. Understanding where the profession must go should start with understanding where we currently are.

Methods: Prior to the events of 2020, in the spring of 2018, we conducted nine key informant interviews to learn about the challenges and best practices from schools deemed to be positive deviants in teaching about structural racism.

Findings: Our interviews showed that even those schools deemed positive deviants in the amount of teaching done about structural racism faced significant barriers in providing a robust education.

Conclusions: Significant structural change, perhaps far beyond what most schools consider themselves willing and able to engage in, will be necessary if future US physicians are to fully understand and address structural racism as it affects their profession, their practice, and their patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Milbank Quarterly
Milbank Quarterly 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Milbank Quarterly is devoted to scholarly analysis of significant issues in health and health care policy. It presents original research, policy analysis, and commentary from academics, clinicians, and policymakers. The in-depth, multidisciplinary approach of the journal permits contributors to explore fully the social origins of health in our society and to examine in detail the implications of different health policies. Topics addressed in The Milbank Quarterly include the impact of social factors on health, prevention, allocation of health care resources, legal and ethical issues in health policy, health and health care administration, and the organization and financing of health care.
期刊最新文献
When the Bough Breaks: The Financial Burden of Childbirth and Postpartum Care by Insurance Type. Launching Financial Incentives for Physician Groups to Improve Equity of Care by Patient Race and Ethnicity. Population Health Implications of Medicaid Prerelease and Transition Services for Incarcerated Populations. Overcoming the Impact of Students for Fair Admission v Harvard to Build a More Representative Health Care Workforce: Perspectives from Ending Unequal Treatment. A Mixed-Methods Exploration of the Implementation of Policies That Earmarked Taxes for Behavioral Health.
×
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