急诊医学模拟课程中并没有明确体现 LGBTQ+ 个人。

MedEdPublish (2016) Pub Date : 2024-04-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/mep.20242.1
Jessica Bod, Samuel Buck, Iris Chandler, Katja Goldflam, Alina Tsyrulnik, Ryan Coughlin, Jessica Fujimoto, Melissa Joseph, David Della-Giustina, Manali Phadke, Dowin Boatright
{"title":"急诊医学模拟课程中并没有明确体现 LGBTQ+ 个人。","authors":"Jessica Bod, Samuel Buck, Iris Chandler, Katja Goldflam, Alina Tsyrulnik, Ryan Coughlin, Jessica Fujimoto, Melissa Joseph, David Della-Giustina, Manali Phadke, Dowin Boatright","doi":"10.12688/mep.20242.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical educational societies have emphasized the inclusion of marginalized populations, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) population, in educational curricula. Lack of inclusion can contribute to health inequality and mistreatment due to unconscious bias. Little didactic time is spent on the care of LGBTQ+ individuals in emergency medicine (EM) curricula. Simulation based medical education can be a helpful pedagogy in teaching cross-cultural care and communication skills. In this study, we sought to determine the representation of the LGBTQ+ population in EM simulation curricula. We also sought to determine if representations of the LGBTQ+ population depicted stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed 971 scenarios from six simulation case banks for LGBTQ+ representation. Frequency distributions were determined for major demographic variables. Chi-Squared or Fisher's Exact Test, depending on the cell counts, were used to determine if relationships existed between LGBTQ+ representation and bank type, author type, and stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 971 scenarios reviewed, eight (0.82%) scenarios explicitly represented LGBTQ+ patients, 319 (32.85%) represented heterosexual patients, and the remaining 644 (66.32%) did not specify these patient characteristics. All cases representing LGBTQ+ patients were found in institutional case banks. Three of the eight cases depicted stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LGBTQ+ individuals are not typically explicitly represented in EM simulation curricula. LGBTQ+ individuals should be more explicitly represented to reduce stigma, allow EM trainees to practice using gender affirming language, address health conditions affecting the LGBTQ+ population, and address possible bias when treating LGBTQ+ patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":74136,"journal":{"name":"MedEdPublish (2016)","volume":"14 ","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11200058/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LGBTQ+ individuals are not explicitly represented in emergency medicine simulation curricula.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Bod, Samuel Buck, Iris Chandler, Katja Goldflam, Alina Tsyrulnik, Ryan Coughlin, Jessica Fujimoto, Melissa Joseph, David Della-Giustina, Manali Phadke, Dowin Boatright\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/mep.20242.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical educational societies have emphasized the inclusion of marginalized populations, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) population, in educational curricula. Lack of inclusion can contribute to health inequality and mistreatment due to unconscious bias. Little didactic time is spent on the care of LGBTQ+ individuals in emergency medicine (EM) curricula. Simulation based medical education can be a helpful pedagogy in teaching cross-cultural care and communication skills. In this study, we sought to determine the representation of the LGBTQ+ population in EM simulation curricula. We also sought to determine if representations of the LGBTQ+ population depicted stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed 971 scenarios from six simulation case banks for LGBTQ+ representation. Frequency distributions were determined for major demographic variables. Chi-Squared or Fisher's Exact Test, depending on the cell counts, were used to determine if relationships existed between LGBTQ+ representation and bank type, author type, and stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 971 scenarios reviewed, eight (0.82%) scenarios explicitly represented LGBTQ+ patients, 319 (32.85%) represented heterosexual patients, and the remaining 644 (66.32%) did not specify these patient characteristics. All cases representing LGBTQ+ patients were found in institutional case banks. Three of the eight cases depicted stigmatized behavior.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LGBTQ+ individuals are not typically explicitly represented in EM simulation curricula. LGBTQ+ individuals should be more explicitly represented to reduce stigma, allow EM trainees to practice using gender affirming language, address health conditions affecting the LGBTQ+ population, and address possible bias when treating LGBTQ+ patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"volume\":\"14 \",\"pages\":\"30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11200058/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MedEdPublish (2016)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.20242.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedEdPublish (2016)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.20242.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:医学教育协会一直强调将边缘化人群,包括女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性者和同性恋者(LGBTQ+)纳入教育课程。由于无意识的偏见,缺乏包容性可能会导致健康不平等和虐待。在急诊医学(EM)课程中,用于LGBTQ+人群护理的授课时间很少。模拟医学教育是一种有助于教授跨文化护理和沟通技巧的教学方法。在这项研究中,我们试图确定 LGBTQ+ 群体在急诊医学模拟课程中的代表性。我们还试图确定LGBTQ+人群的表现是否描述了污名化行为:我们审查了六个模拟案例库中的 971 个场景,以了解 LGBTQ+ 的代表性。我们确定了主要人口统计学变量的频率分布。根据单元计数,使用齐次方检验(Chi-Squared)或费雪精确检验(Fisher's Exact Test)来确定 LGBTQ+ 代表性与银行类型、作者类型和污名化行为之间是否存在关系:在审查的 971 个案例中,有 8 个案例(0.82%)明确代表了 LGBTQ+ 患者,319 个案例(32.85%)代表了异性恋患者,其余 644 个案例(66.32%)没有说明这些患者的特征。所有代表 LGBTQ+ 患者的案例都是在机构案例库中找到的。8 个病例中有 3 个描述了污名化行为:结论:LGBTQ+人群在急诊模拟课程中通常没有明确体现。LGBTQ+人群应得到更明确的体现,以减少污名化,让急诊科受训人员练习使用性别肯定语言,解决影响LGBTQ+人群的健康问题,并解决治疗LGBTQ+患者时可能存在的偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
LGBTQ+ individuals are not explicitly represented in emergency medicine simulation curricula.

Background: Medical educational societies have emphasized the inclusion of marginalized populations, including the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) population, in educational curricula. Lack of inclusion can contribute to health inequality and mistreatment due to unconscious bias. Little didactic time is spent on the care of LGBTQ+ individuals in emergency medicine (EM) curricula. Simulation based medical education can be a helpful pedagogy in teaching cross-cultural care and communication skills. In this study, we sought to determine the representation of the LGBTQ+ population in EM simulation curricula. We also sought to determine if representations of the LGBTQ+ population depicted stigmatized behavior.

Methods: We reviewed 971 scenarios from six simulation case banks for LGBTQ+ representation. Frequency distributions were determined for major demographic variables. Chi-Squared or Fisher's Exact Test, depending on the cell counts, were used to determine if relationships existed between LGBTQ+ representation and bank type, author type, and stigmatized behavior.

Results: Of the 971 scenarios reviewed, eight (0.82%) scenarios explicitly represented LGBTQ+ patients, 319 (32.85%) represented heterosexual patients, and the remaining 644 (66.32%) did not specify these patient characteristics. All cases representing LGBTQ+ patients were found in institutional case banks. Three of the eight cases depicted stigmatized behavior.

Conclusions: LGBTQ+ individuals are not typically explicitly represented in EM simulation curricula. LGBTQ+ individuals should be more explicitly represented to reduce stigma, allow EM trainees to practice using gender affirming language, address health conditions affecting the LGBTQ+ population, and address possible bias when treating LGBTQ+ 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 weeks
×
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