Search

Introduction: To address persistent gender inequities in academic medicine, women professional development groups (PDG) have been developed to support the advancement of women in medicine. While these programs have shown promising outcomes, long-term evaluative metrics do not currently exist. The objective of this study was to establish metrics to assess women’s PDGs. Methods: This was a modified Delphi study that included an expert panel of current and past emergency department (ED) chairs and Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) presidents. The panel completed three iterative surveys to develop and rank metrics to assess women PDGs. Metrics established by the expert panel were also distributed for member-checking to women EM faculty. Results: The expert panel ranked 11 metrics with high to moderate consensus ranking with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; recruitment; and compensation. Members ranked 12 metrics with high consensus with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; compensation; and gender equity in promotion rates among faculty. Participants emphasized that departments should be responsible for leading gender equity efforts with PDGs providing a supportive role. Conclusion: In this study, we identified metrics that can be used to assess academic EDs’ gender equity initiatives and the advisory efforts of a departmental women’s PDG. These metrics can be tailored to individual departmental/institutional needs, as well as to a PDG’s mission. Importantly, PDGs can use metrics to develop and assess programming, acknowledging that many metrics are the responsibility of the department rather than the PDG.

Introduction: The application of structural competency and structural vulnerability to emergency medicine (EM) research has not been previously described despite EM researchers routinely engaging structurally vulnerable populations. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review and consensus-building process to develop a structurally competent research approach and operational framework relevant to EM research. Methods: We conducted a scoping review focused on structural competency and structural vulnerability. Results of the review informed the development of a structural competency research framework that was presented throughout a multi-step consensus process culminating in the 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference. Feedback to the framework was incorporated throughout the conference. Results: The scoping review produced 291 articles with 123 articles relevant to EM research. All 123 articles underwent full-text review and data extraction following a standardized data extraction form. Most of the articles acknowledged or described structures that lead to inequities with a variety of methodological approaches used to operationalize structural competency and/or structural vulnerability. The framework developed aligned with components of the research process, drawing upon methodologies from studies included in the scoping review. Conclusion: The framework developed provides a starting point for EM researchers seeking to understand, acknowledge, and incorporate structural competency into EM research. By incorporating components of the framework, researchers may enhance their ability to address social, historical, political, and economic forces that lead to health inequities, reframing drivers of inequities away from individual factors and focusing on structural factors.