Caroline Minnick, Kevin Alexander Soltany, Sudarshan Krishnamurthy, Maeve Murray, Roy Strowd, Kimberly Montez
{"title":"Medical students value advocacy and health policy training in undergraduate medical education: A mixed methods study.","authors":"Caroline Minnick, Kevin Alexander Soltany, Sudarshan Krishnamurthy, Maeve Murray, Roy Strowd, Kimberly Montez","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to describe medical students' perceptions and experiences with health policy and advocacy training and practice and define motivations and barriers for engagement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a mixed-methods study of medical students from May to October 2022. Students were invited to participate in a web-based survey and optional follow-up phone interview. Surveys were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Phone interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Interviews were coded inductively using a coding dictionary. Themes were identified using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35/580 survey responses (6% response rate) and 15 interviews were completed. 100% rated social factors as related to overall health. 65.7% of participants felt \"very confident\" or \"extremely confident\" in identifying social needs but only 11.4% felt \"very confident\" in addressing these needs. From interviews, six themes were identified: (1) participants recognized that involvement in health policy and/or advocacy is a duty of physicians; (2) participants acknowledged physicians' voices as well respected; (3) participants were comfortable identifying social determinants of health but felt unprepared to address needs; (4) barriers to future involvement included intimidation, self-doubt, and skepticism of impact; (5) past exposures and awareness of advocacy topics motivated participants to engage in health policy and/or advocacy during medical school; and (6) participants identified areas where the training on these topics excelled and offered recommendations for improvement, including simulation, earlier integration, and teaching on health-related laws and policies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study highlights the importance of involvement in health policy and advocacy among medical students and the need for enhanced education and exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to describe medical students' perceptions and experiences with health policy and advocacy training and practice and define motivations and barriers for engagement.
Methods: This was a mixed-methods study of medical students from May to October 2022. Students were invited to participate in a web-based survey and optional follow-up phone interview. Surveys were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Phone interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Interviews were coded inductively using a coding dictionary. Themes were identified using thematic analysis.
Results: 35/580 survey responses (6% response rate) and 15 interviews were completed. 100% rated social factors as related to overall health. 65.7% of participants felt "very confident" or "extremely confident" in identifying social needs but only 11.4% felt "very confident" in addressing these needs. From interviews, six themes were identified: (1) participants recognized that involvement in health policy and/or advocacy is a duty of physicians; (2) participants acknowledged physicians' voices as well respected; (3) participants were comfortable identifying social determinants of health but felt unprepared to address needs; (4) barriers to future involvement included intimidation, self-doubt, and skepticism of impact; (5) past exposures and awareness of advocacy topics motivated participants to engage in health policy and/or advocacy during medical school; and (6) participants identified areas where the training on these topics excelled and offered recommendations for improvement, including simulation, earlier integration, and teaching on health-related laws and policies.
Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of involvement in health policy and advocacy among medical students and the need for enhanced education and exposure.