The Mount Sinai journal of medicine, New York
-
Despite recent drastic cutbacks in federal funding for programs to diversify academic medicine, many such programs survive and continue to set examples for others of how to successfully increase the participation of minorities underrepresented in the healthcare professions and, in particular, how to increase physician and nonphysician minority medical faculty. This article provides an overview of such programs, including those in historically black colleges and universities, minority-serving institutions, research-intensive private and public medical schools, and more primary care-oriented public medical schools. Although the models for faculty development developed by these successful schools overlap, each has unique features worthy of consideration by other schools seeking to develop programs of their own. The ingredients of success are discussed in detail in another article in this theme issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Ingredients of Success."
-
In fiscal year 2006, the US Government abruptly and drastically reduced its funding for programs to increase the racial and ethnic diversity of academic medicine, including programs to increase the development of minority medical faculty. Anticipating this reduction, 4 such programs-the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry in New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine-decided to pool their resources, forming the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development. An innovation in minority faculty development, the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development has succeeded in exposing faculty trainees to research and teaching that they might not have considered otherwise, expanding the number and diversity of their mentors and role models, providing them potential access to larger and different populations and databases for purposes of research, and expanding their peer contacts. After introducing the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development, this article describes the origins and goals of each member program.
-
Historical Article
Diversity in academic medicine no. 2 history of battles lost and won.
Spurred by its rapidly changing demographics, the United States is striving to reduce and eliminate racial and ethnic health disparities. To do so, it must overcome the legacy of individual, institutional, and structural racism and resolve conflicts in related political and social ideologies. This has moved the struggle over diversity in the health professions outside the laboratories and ivy-covered walls of academic medicine into the halls of Congress and chambers of the US Supreme Court. ⋯ Beginning in the 1970s and continuing today, legal challenges to measures for realizing equal opportunity and leveling the playing field have reached the US Supreme Court and state-wide ballot initiatives. These historical challenges and successes are the subject of this article. Although the history is not exhaustive, it aims to provide an important context for the struggles of advocates to improve the representation of underrepresented minorities in medicine and reduce racial and ethnic health disparities.
-
More than a decade ago, Dr. Joseph Goldstein called attention to the increasing dissociation between scientific advances and their translation into improved health with his pithy analysis of the biotechnology industry: “1 new gene per day, 1 new company per week, 1 new drug per year.” Unfortunately, the gap continues to grow, with increasing concerns about whether the enormous increase in knowledge brought about by the sequencing of the human genome and other scientific advances are being matched by the translational effort. For example, a recent review by the Congressional Budget Office found that the dramatic increase in inflation-adjusted funding of biomedical research since 1970 by the pharmaceutical industry and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), in addition to the influx of capital from the biotechnology industry, has had only a minor impact on the number of truly new drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration each year. The outlook for the immediate future does not appear to be much brighter, with declining numbers of new drugs being submitted for regulatory approval and the investment community expressing grave concerns about the prospects for both the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries., It is not surprising, therefore, that there has been intense focus on how to successfully bridge the gap between scientific discovery and the development of new strategies to diagnose, treat, and prevent disease; this process is now commonly called translational research.
-
Academic hospitalists have grown in number and influence over the past decade. This has fueled concerns about the effect of hospitalists on resident and student education. While the bulk of the literature favors the hospitalist teaching model to a more traditional model concerns remain that hospitalists may negatively impact housestaff autonomy and reduce exposure to subspeciality physicians. This paper will review the literature exploring the effect of the hospitalist teaching model on resident and student education.