Departmental Metrics to Guide Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion for Academic Family Medicine Departments.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Shalina Nair, José E Rodríguez, Samantha Elwood, Elisabeth Wilson, Annamalai Ramanathan, Debra Stulberg, Belinda Vail, Kristen Rundell, C. J. Peek
{"title":"Departmental Metrics to Guide Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion for Academic Family Medicine Departments.","authors":"Shalina Nair, José E Rodríguez, Samantha Elwood, Elisabeth Wilson, Annamalai Ramanathan, Debra Stulberg, Belinda Vail, Kristen Rundell, C. J. Peek","doi":"10.22454/fammed.2024.865619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PROBLEM\nEquity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) efforts have accelerated over the past several years, without a traditional guidebook that other missions often have. To evaluate progress over time, departments of family medicine are seeking ways to measure their current EDI state. Across the specialty, unity regarding which EDI metrics are meaningful is absent, and discordance even exists about what should be measured.\n\n\nAPPROACH\nThis paper provides a general metrics framework, including a wide array of possibilities to consider measuring, for assessing individual departmental progress in this broad space. These measures are designed to be general enough to provide common language and can be customized to align with strategic priorities of individual family medicine departments.\n\n\nOUTCOMES\nThe Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee of the Association of Departments of Family Medicine has produced a common framework to facilitate measurement of EDI outcomes in the following areas: care delivery and health, workforce recruitment and retention, learner recruitment and training, and research participation. This framework allows departments to monitor progress across these domains that impact the tripartite mission, providing opportunities to capitalize on measured gains in EDI.\n\n\nNEXT STEPS\nDepartments can review this framework and consider which metrics are applicable or develop their own metrics to align with their strategic priorities. In the future, collective departments could compare notes and measure aggregate progress together. Evaluating progress is a step in the journey toward the goal of ensuring that departments are operating from inclusive and just academic systems.","PeriodicalId":50456,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/fammed.2024.865619","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PROBLEM Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) efforts have accelerated over the past several years, without a traditional guidebook that other missions often have. To evaluate progress over time, departments of family medicine are seeking ways to measure their current EDI state. Across the specialty, unity regarding which EDI metrics are meaningful is absent, and discordance even exists about what should be measured. APPROACH This paper provides a general metrics framework, including a wide array of possibilities to consider measuring, for assessing individual departmental progress in this broad space. These measures are designed to be general enough to provide common language and can be customized to align with strategic priorities of individual family medicine departments. OUTCOMES The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee of the Association of Departments of Family Medicine has produced a common framework to facilitate measurement of EDI outcomes in the following areas: care delivery and health, workforce recruitment and retention, learner recruitment and training, and research participation. This framework allows departments to monitor progress across these domains that impact the tripartite mission, providing opportunities to capitalize on measured gains in EDI. NEXT STEPS Departments can review this framework and consider which metrics are applicable or develop their own metrics to align with their strategic priorities. In the future, collective departments could compare notes and measure aggregate progress together. Evaluating progress is a step in the journey toward the goal of ensuring that departments are operating from inclusive and just academic systems.
指导全科医学学术部门实现公平、多样性和包容性的部门指标。
问题公平、多样性和包容性(EDI)工作在过去几年中加快了步伐,但却没有其他任务通常具有的传统指导手册。为了评估随着时间推移所取得的进展,全科医学系正在寻找衡量其当前 EDI 状态的方法。本文提供了一个通用的衡量框架,包括一系列可以考虑的衡量方法,用于评估各科室在这一广泛领域的进展。这些衡量标准旨在提供通用语言,并可根据各全科医学系的战略重点进行定制。结果全科医学系协会多元化、公平与包容委员会制定了一个通用框架,以方便衡量以下领域的 EDI 成果:医疗服务与健康、劳动力招聘与保留、学习者招聘与培训以及研究参与。通过该框架,各部门可以监控影响三方使命的这些领域的进展情况,从而有机会利用所衡量的 EDI 成果。各部门可以审查该框架,并考虑哪些指标适用,或制定自己的指标,以符合其战略重点。今后,各部门可以进行集体比较,共同衡量总体进展情况。评估进展是实现确保各部门在包容和公正的学术体系中运作这一目标的一个步骤。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Family Medicine
Family Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
21.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Medicine, the official journal of the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, publishes original research, systematic reviews, narrative essays, and policy analyses relevant to the discipline of family medicine, particularly focusing on primary care medical education, health workforce policy, and health services research. Journal content is not limited to educational research from family medicine educators; and we welcome innovative, high-quality contributions from authors in a variety of specialties and academic fields.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信