An Evaluation of STFM's Academic Family Medicine Antiracism Learning Collaborative.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Anam Siddiqi, Radhika Laddha, Tristen Adams, Jeongyoung Park, Edgar Figueroa, Sarah Kureshi, Mary Theobald, Yalda Jabbarpour, Melissa K Filippi
{"title":"An Evaluation of STFM's Academic Family Medicine Antiracism Learning Collaborative.","authors":"Anam Siddiqi, Radhika Laddha, Tristen Adams, Jeongyoung Park, Edgar Figueroa, Sarah Kureshi, Mary Theobald, Yalda Jabbarpour, Melissa K Filippi","doi":"10.22454/FamMed.2025.713835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) antiracism task force created and led an Antiracism Learning Collaborative (ALC) to help STFM members identify racist structures and behaviors within their academic institutions and develop projects to become leaders for change. The Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care was tasked with evaluating whether the 2-year program's goals were met.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Through a call for applications, 20 dyads were accepted for participation. At least one dyad member had to be of a racial or an ethnic population that is underrepresented in the medical profession. Participant involvement took place from January 2022 through September 2023. The following data sources were evaluated: project plans, four survey sets, anecdotal meeting notes, mentor meeting forms, and final reports and presentations from the dyads.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 34 participants (17 dyads) completed the study from 17 institutions. Generally, participants learned several antiracism concepts and how to take steps to counter racist structures and behaviors through actionable approaches and language use. Strengths of the program were the tools and resources offered to dyads for their project implementation. Two major challenges were institutional opposition or lack of support and lack of time (both for dyads and for various local community partners).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, ALC met each goal. Future evaluations of similar initiatives should consider defining what success for individual projects looks like and provide a predefined rubric to gauge success.</p>","PeriodicalId":50456,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine","volume":"57 3","pages":"208-217"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12101554/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/FamMed.2025.713835","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

Background and objectives: The Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) antiracism task force created and led an Antiracism Learning Collaborative (ALC) to help STFM members identify racist structures and behaviors within their academic institutions and develop projects to become leaders for change. The Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care was tasked with evaluating whether the 2-year program's goals were met.

Methods: Through a call for applications, 20 dyads were accepted for participation. At least one dyad member had to be of a racial or an ethnic population that is underrepresented in the medical profession. Participant involvement took place from January 2022 through September 2023. The following data sources were evaluated: project plans, four survey sets, anecdotal meeting notes, mentor meeting forms, and final reports and presentations from the dyads.

Results: A total of 34 participants (17 dyads) completed the study from 17 institutions. Generally, participants learned several antiracism concepts and how to take steps to counter racist structures and behaviors through actionable approaches and language use. Strengths of the program were the tools and resources offered to dyads for their project implementation. Two major challenges were institutional opposition or lack of support and lack of time (both for dyads and for various local community partners).

Conclusions: Overall, ALC met each goal. Future evaluations of similar initiatives should consider defining what success for individual projects looks like and provide a predefined rubric to gauge success.

STFM学术性家庭医学反种族歧视学习合作评估。
背景和目标:家庭医学教师协会(STFM)反种族主义工作组创建并领导了反种族主义学习协作(ALC),以帮助STFM成员识别其学术机构中的种族主义结构和行为,并制定项目以成为变革的领导者。罗伯特·格雷厄姆家庭医学和初级保健政策研究中心的任务是评估这个为期两年的项目是否达到了目标。方法:通过公开征集,接受20人参加。至少有一名二人组成员必须来自在医疗专业中代表性不足的种族或族裔人口。参与者参与的时间为2022年1月至2023年9月。评估了以下数据来源:项目计划,四个调查集,轶事会议记录,导师会议表格,以及二人组的最终报告和演示。结果:共有来自17个机构的34名参与者(17对)完成了研究。总的来说,与会者学习了几个反种族主义概念,以及如何通过可操作的方法和语言使用采取措施来反对种族主义结构和行为。该计划的优势在于为他们的项目实施提供了工具和资源。两个主要的挑战是机构的反对或缺乏支持和缺乏时间(无论是对二人组还是对各种当地社区伙伴)。结论:总体而言,ALC达到了各项目标。将来对类似计划的评估应该考虑定义单个项目的成功是什么样的,并提供一个预定义的标准来衡量成功。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信