Developing Evidence to Improve Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the MD-Scientist Workforce

医生和科学家的劳动力始终未能反映出美国和美国的种族和民族构成。 美国各州普通人群和医学院。在医学教育中， 职业身份形成的重要性，定义为价值观，信仰，愿望和 与职业规范相一致的归属感。有证据表明，在医疗过程中， 学校在塑造医生-科学家职业身份形成方面发挥着关键作用， 医学代表性不足（URIM）和非URIM学生之间的经验不同。但鲜为人知的 关于最成功的医学院的培训实践和组织特点， 在URiM医学生中形成公平的医生-科学家职业身份，包括黑人， 西班牙裔/拉丁美洲人和美洲原住民。 我们提出了一个多阶段的混合方法研究，以确定培训实践和组织 在公平的医生-科学家职业身份方面取得最大成功的医学博士项目的特点 形成URIM单学位医学生，相对于非URIM学生。这一目标将是 通过以下具体目标实现：1）使用美国医学院协会的数据 [AAMC]毕业问卷[GQ]，以确定一贯表现出最大， 在URiM医学生中，公平的医生-科学家职业身份形成的成功率最低 相对于非URiM学生; 2）发展关于最佳实践和组织特征的假设， 通过进行深入的定性研究，促进公平的医生-科学家专业身份的形成， 在医学博士课程的采访中，展示了公平的医生-科学家之间最大和最小的成功 专业身份的形成，以及; 3）评估实践和组织之间的关联 目标2中确定的特征和医生-科学家专业身份形成的一致公平 通过一项全国性的调查，以确定广泛适用于美国医学博士的最佳实践和特点 程序. 这项研究意义重大，因为它将提供信息，为加强种族和族裔平等的努力提供信息。 医生和科学家劳动力的多样性。我们的主要成果机构层面的公平在医生科学家 URiM和非URiM学生之间的发展是创新和实用的。而医生的比率- 由于医学博士项目的研究强度等特征，科学家的发展可能会有所不同 学校，在医学博士非URiM和URiM学生之间的医生-科学家发展率的差距 这些方案表明了资源平等分配和歧视性做法方面的潜在问题。 传播将采取学术出版物和现实世界交流的形式（工具包、网站、 播客等）与知名度高的国家组织合作，AAMC，最大的影响。

The physician-scientist workforce persistently fails to reflect the racial and ethnic composition of both the United States' (U.S.) general population and medical schools. There is growing attention in medical education to the importance of professional identity formation, defined as the development of values, beliefs, aspirations, and sense of affiliation aligned with the norms of the profession. There is evidence that experiences during medical school play a critical role in shaping physician-scientist professional identity formation, and that these experiences differ between underrepresented in medicine (URiM) and non-URiM students. Yet little is known about training practices and organizational characteristics of medical schools with the greatest success in equitable physician-scientist professional identity formation among URiM medical students, including Blacks, Hispanic/Latinx Americans, and Native Americans. We propose a multi-stage mixed methods study to identify the training practices and organizational characteristics of MD programs with greatest success in equitable physician-scientist professional identity formation among URiM single-degree medical students, relative to non-URIM students. This objective will be achieved through the following specific aims: 1) use data from the Association of American Medical Colleges [AAMC] Graduation Questionnaire [GQ] to identify MD programs which consistently demonstrate greatest and least success in equitable physician-scientist professional identity formation among URiM medical students relative to non-URiM students; 2) develop hypotheses about best practices and organizational characteristics for promoting equitable physician-scientist professional identity formation by conducting in-depth qualitative interviews at MD programs demonstrating the greatest and least success in equitable physician-scientist professional identity formation, and; 3) evaluate associations between practices and organizational characteristics identified in Aim 2 and consistent equity in physician-scientist professional identity formation through a national survey to identify best practices and characteristics that are broadly applicable to U.S. MD programs. This study is significant because it will provide information that can inform efforts to enhance the racial and ethnic diversity of the physician-scientist workforce. Our primary outcome of institution-level equity in physician-scientist development between URiM and non-URiM students is innovative and practical. Whereas rates of physician- scientist development may differ between MD programs, due to characteristics such as research intensity of the school, disparities in rates of physician-scientist development between non-URiM and URiM students within MD programs signal potential issues regarding egalitarian distribution of resources and discriminatory practices. Dissemination will take the form of scholarly publications and real-world communications (toolkit, website, podcasts, etc.) in partnership with high-profile national organizations, e.g., AAMC, for maximal impact.