[Perforation of a gastric ulcer into the left ventricle of the heart].

A. Ritz,R. Fischer

1966-03-12

Swiss Medical Weekly

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022

Nupur Agrawal,Jessica Lucier,Rikke Ogawa,Abigail Arons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-023-08244-x

Abstract:Background: Advocacy is an integral component of a physician's professional responsibilities, yet efforts to teach advocacy skills in a systematic and comprehensive manner have been inconsistent and challenging. There is currently no consensus on the tools and content that should be included in advocacy curricula for graduate medical trainees. Objective: To conduct a systematic review of recently published GME advocacy curricula and delineate foundational concepts and topics in advocacy education that are pertinent to trainees across specialties and career paths. Methods: We conducted an updated systematic review based off Howell et al. (J Gen Intern Med 34(11):2592-2601, 2019) to identify articles published between September 2017 and March 2022 that described GME advocacy curricula developed in the USA and Canada. Searches of grey literature were used to find citations potentially missed by the search strategy. Articles were independently reviewed by two authors to identify those meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria; a third author resolved discrepancies. Three reviewers used a web-based interface to extract curricular details from the final selection of articles. Two reviewers conducted a detailed analysis of recurring themes in curricular design and implementation. Results: Of 867 articles reviewed, 26 articles, describing 31 unique curricula, met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The majority (84%) represented Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry programs. The most common learning methods included experiential learning, didactics, and project-based work. Most covered community partnerships (58%) and legislative advocacy (58%) as advocacy tools and social determinants of health (58%) as an educational topic. Evaluation results were inconsistently reported. Analysis of recurring themes showed that advocacy curricula benefit from an overarching culture supportive of advocacy education and should ideally be learner-centric, educator-friendly, and action-oriented. Discussion: Combining core features of advocacy curricula identified in prior publications with our findings, we propose an integrative framework to guide design and implementation of advocacy curricula for GME trainees. Additional research is needed to build expert consensus and ultimately develop model curricula for disseminated use.
An unusual right coronary artery obstruction after mitral surgery.

M. Arnould,C. Barbey,S. Chassaing

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acvd.2011.08.006

IF: 3.196

Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases

Abstract:
Advocating with Community: A Community-Engaged Advocacy Curriculum for Internal Medicine Residents

Raskob, Kathleen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-09049-2

IF: 5.7

2024-09-25

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract:In 2022, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education updated its competencies for residents in all specialties to include health policy advocacy. A recent systematic review shows that while a growing number of residency curricula include policy advocacy, few programs join in policy advocacy efforts with community partners.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services
How Are We Teaching Advocacy? A National Survey of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors

Joel R. Burnett,Bryanna De Lima,Emily S. Wang,Kelly McGarry,Daniel I. Kim,Michael Kisielewski,Kelsi Manley,Sima S. Desai,Elizabeth Eckstrom,Tracey L. Henry

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-08753-3

IF: 5.7

2024-05-08

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract:Although internal medicine (IM) physicians accept public advocacy as a professional responsibility, there is little evidence that IM training programs teach advocacy skills. The prevalence and characteristics of public advocacy curricula in US IM residency programs are unknown.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services
Advocacy Skill Development in Public Health Education Curriculum: A Pilot Study

Alexis Blavos,Heidi Hancher-Rauch,Antonio Gardner,Vincent Lam,Salma Haidar,Jodi Brookins-Fisher,Amy Thompson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399241287207

2024-10-18

Abstract:The National Commission for Health Education Credentialing (NCHEC) released updated Responsibilities and Competencies for Health Education Specialists based on the 2020 HESPA II. For the first time, advocacy is a standalone area of responsibility (Area V: Advocacy) for health education specialists. Although this is exciting for the field of health education, there is limited consensus on how to effectively teach advocacy or what content and skills to include. Furthermore, while the HESPA II was updated, the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) criteria for advocacy have not been. This pilot study examined how CEPH-accredited programs in the United States are addressing the profession-wide advocacy competency in their health education curricula. A cross-sectional research design with single-point data collection was used to assess how CEPH-accredited university programs (including Standalone Baccalaureate Programs, Public Health Programs, and Schools of Public Health) are preparing health education students to meet the national advocacy responsibility. The survey included items from the Advocacy Area of Responsibility and potential barriers for faculty teaching advocacy. Results indicate that most programs are teaching something about advocacy, but there is no program teaching all listed sub-competencies. Barriers to including all components of the advocacy responsibility were largely related to faculty motivation, knowledge, and time. With a full responsibility area devoted to advocacy, it is reasonable to expect that programs will adjust with the profession. However, program administrators must be catalysts for these changes in their individual programs.
Abstract B104: Identifying gaps in equitable cancer care: insights from US-based oncology professionals engaged in continuing medical education

Monica Augustyniak,Karen Eldridge,Jayne Gurtler,Benyam Muluneh,Amy DePue,Julia Rodriguez-O'Donnell,Stacy Atkinson,Sophie Péloquin,Ann Murphy,Patrice Lazure

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-b104

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Introduction: A previous evaluation of a five-part accredited continuing medical education (CME) designed to inspire action for equitable cancer care amongst US-based multidisciplinary oncology care team members, showed significant improvements in relevant knowledge and confidence (pre to post activity). This study aimed to revisit the data collected in the scope of this project to identify remaining challenges in ensuring equitable cancer care is delivered to all patients, with underlying gaps in knowledge, confidence and attitude that may be addressed through future CME. Methods: A secondary analysis of data was performed on quantitative (case-based multiple-choice) responses collected from US-based HCPs who completed at least one of the five accredited CME activities that were part of the program titled "Addressing Racial Disparities in Cancer Care". Questions assessed learners' knowledge, confidence, and attitudes after exposure to the CME. Crosstabulations with chi-square statistical tests compared quantitative responses by sub-group. The analysis focused on post-CME data to identify remaining educational gaps, with the aim of informing the development of future CME programs. Results: The five-part CME education reached 1151 unique HCPs involved in cancer care, with activity participation varying between n=103 to n=433. The profession/specialty sub-group most represented in aggregated responses across the five-part CME were registered nurses specialized in hematology/oncology (n=575/1145, 50%). Across US regions, respondents were mostly located in South US (n=446/1150, 39%). A challenge in helping patients navigate socio- economic barriers to oncology care was found, with the following four related gaps affecting a portion of respondents post-CME exposure: 1) misconception that the most important determinant of treatment adherence is a patient's perceived treatment efficacy rather than optimal patient-provider communication (n=57/400, 14%), 2) sub-optimal knowledge of the impact of a patient's community and/or partner on influencing their treatment-seeking behavior (n=31/97, 32%), 3) sub-optimal knowledge of necessary steps to address the root cause of a patients' missed appointments (n=36/227, 16%), 4) sub-optimal confidence in addressing a patients' personal circumstances limiting their access to cancer-care (n=424/1151, 37%). Conclusions: This study identified remaining gaps in knowledge, confidence and attitude among US-based HCPs post-exposure to a CME activity aimed at promoting equitable cancer care. Considering these gaps were observed post-education, the actual proportion of US-based HCPs affected is likely underestimated. Future continuing learning initiatives aimed at addressing cancer care disparities in the US should consider targeting gaps identified in this study by challenging learners to re-consider their knowledge, beliefs and confidence in best approaches to navigating the socio-economic barriers hindering patients from seeking cancer care (e.g., via adaptive learning, peer-to-peer learning). Citation Format: Monica Augustyniak, Karen Eldridge, Jayne Gurtler, Benyam Muluneh, Amy DePue, Julia Rodriguez-O'Donnell, Stacy Atkinson, Sophie Péloquin, Ann Murphy, Patrice Lazure. Identifying gaps in equitable cancer care: insights from US-based oncology professionals engaged in continuing medical education [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr B104.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Incorporating Health Policy and Advocacy Curricula Into Undergraduate Medical Education in the United States

Sudarshan Krishnamurthy,Kevin Alexander Soltany,Kimberly Montez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205231191601

2023-07-31

Abstract:Physicians serve as crucial advocates for their patients. Undergraduate medical education (UME) must move beyond the biomedical model, built upon the perception that health is defined purely in the absence of illness, to also incorporate population health through health policy, advocacy, and community engagement to account for structural and social determinants of health. Currently, the US guidelines for UME lack structured training in health policy or advocacy, leaving trainees ill-equipped to assume their role as physician-advocates or to engage with communities. There is an undeniable need to educate future physicians on legislative advocacy toward improving the social determinants of health through the creation of evidence-based health policy, in addition to training in effective techniques to engage in partnership with the communities in which physicians serve. The authors of this article also present curricular case studies around two programs at their institution that could be used to implement similar programs at other US medical schools.
Growth hormone for small-for-gestational-age children: short and sweet?

J. Silverstein,D. Shulman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/MPD.2003.74

IF: 2.99

2003-02-01

Jornal de Pediatria

Abstract:
Physician engagement in reproductive health advocacy: findings from a mixed methods evaluation of a leadership and advocacy program

Heidi E. Jones,Meredith Manze,Anita Brakman,Amy Kwan,MiQuel Davies,Diana Romero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05410-5

IF: 3.263

2024-05-01

BMC Medical Education

Abstract:Medical curricula include advocacy competencies, but how much physicians engage in advocacy and what enables this engagement is not well characterized. The authors assessed facilitators and barriers to advocacy identified by physician alumni of a reproductive health advocacy training program.

education & educational research,education, scientific disciplines
Infection from intravenous "scalp-vein" needles in a susceptible population.

S. Lowenbraum,V. Young,D. Kenton,A. Serpick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMA.1970.03170160041007

1970-04-20

Abstract:Intravenous indwelling scalp-vein needles were cultured in a population with neoplastic disease. Twenty-four of the 74 needles cultured were positive; microorganisms generally considered pathogenic grew from 7 of these needles. The latter organisms included Staphylococcus aureus , Pseudomonas aeruginosa , Candida albicans , α-hemolytic Streptococcus, and group D Streptococcus . Infected scalpvein needles were the bacteriologic source in one case of septicemia and one case of cellulitis. There was a trend toward increasing incidence of growth with increasing duration of needle placement.
Innovation in cancer policy & health systems education during hematology-oncology (HO) fellowship training: Single center experience.

S. M. Qasim Hussaini,Krista Y. Chen,Ross C. Donehower,Kristen A. Marrone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2023.19.11_suppl.446

2023-11-01

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:446 Background: Cancer care delivery and outcomes in the US are influenced by a complex health system and regulatory environment. To our knowledge, a structured approach to education on these topics during HO training is lacking. We sought to evaluate baseline knowledge and establish a longitudinal curriculum aimed at educating HO trainees on cancer policy. Methods: First year HO trainees at Johns Hopkins were surveyed on their prior education related to affordability, social determinants of health, and oncologic drug development. Based on these results, a longitudinal curriculum with 10 didactic sessions led by invited content experts was developed and implemented into the 2022-23 academic year schedule. Impact of curriculum was evaluated through anonymous surveys at the beginning and end of each teaching session. Results: Pre-curricular intervention survey was completed by 12 fellows (100% response rate; 58% female, 41.6% White; 16.6% IMGs). All had treated patients that were uninsured (100%, n = 12), unable to afford care (100%, n = 12), or lacked stable housing, transportation, food and employment (100%, n = 12). Smaller number had counseled patients on clinical trial enrollment (50%, n = 6) or discussed trial endpoints (33%, n = 4). Systems education prior to fellowship varied by topic: social determinants of health (33%, n = 4), critical appraisal of clinical trials (33%, n = 4), oncologic care in low-resource settings (41.6%, n = 5), high-value care (66%, n = 8), health insurance (91%, n = 11). Pre and post-surveys demonstrated each teaching session was associated with a significant improvement in fellows’ confidence in understanding pre-set lecture objectives (Table; cumulative mean improvement 1.14 from “neutral” pre-intervention, to “agree” or “strongly agree” post-intervention). Conclusions: We demonstrate lack of education on practice-relevant systems topics in HO trainees at time of subspecialty education initiation. Our longitudinal systems education curriculum improved trainee awareness and understanding of these complex topics. Future efforts will build on this scalable curriculum utilizing trainee feedback and departmental buy-in with the goal of training an oncologic workforce better equipped to counsel patients, navigate structural barriers, and appraise evidence.[Table: see text]

oncology
Cancer Education in Poland: Current Status and Suggestions for Improvement

Joanna Wawryka,Paulina Ziobro,Maciej Tyszko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-016-1033-2

2016-04-15

Journal of Cancer Education

Abstract:In this article, we want to describe the opportunities we experienced though involvement with the AACE and EACE to improve cancer education in poland from our points of view as fifth-year medicine students. By participating in the annual meeting of the EACE that our university (Wroclaw ) hosted and also the ESMI-ESO course on medical oncology for medical students, we were able to improve our doctor- patient skills and deepen our knowledge caring for cancer patients. In our opinion in the obligatory medical curriculum in Poland, the curricular offerings in oncology should be better coordinated and there is too little attention to the teaching of the so called “soft skills” for future doctors. Over the course our studies, we are taught a great deal about the biology, diagnosis and symptomatology of cancer; however, we are not exposed very much to issues of communication between the doctor and the oncology patient, or appropriate strategies to pass information about the diagnosis and prognosis. Therefore, we feel that it is important for the future for students to learn more about such topics. Many do this in informal, extracurricular ways as there is much interest to learn about such topics and we will discuss several useful tools. In this review, we would like to summarize the current state of oncology education in Poland and our hopes for improving the current state and to emphasize how inspiring it was for us to participate in an international cancer education meeting where we could discuss good ideas from all over the world and bring them home to Poland.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health,education, scientific disciplines
The courage to advocate: How two professions approach public advocacy work

Christopher Watling,David Sandomierski,Sophie Poinar,Jennifer Shaw,Kori LaDonna

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15430

2024-05-15

Abstract:Background: While health advocacy is an established physician role, most of the educational attention to advocacy has been at the individual patient level. Public advocacy-efforts to effect change at the level of communities, populations or society-remains a poorly defined concept whose educational foundation is underdeveloped. To enrich our understanding of public advocacy, we explored how professionals in two disciplines-medicine and law-have approached its tasks and experienced its challenges. Methods: Using constructivist grounded theory, we interviewed 18 professionals (nine physicians, eight lawyers and one qualified in both disciplines) who engage in public advocacy. We used constant comparison throughout an iterative process of data collection and analysis to develop an understanding of what it means to be a professional in the public domain. Results: Public advocacy work occurs at the intersection of personal and professional identities. Lawyers perceived public advocacy as an embedded element of their professional identity, while physicians more often viewed it as outside their core professional scope. Nonetheless, professional identity influenced how both groups conducted their work. Physicians were more likely to draw on professional attitudes (e.g. their orientation towards evidence and their trusted social position), while lawyers were more likely to draw on professional skills (e.g. building an argument and litigating test cases). The work requires courage and often demands that individuals tolerate personal and professional risk. Conclusion: While medicine has enshrined advocacy in its competency frameworks, it is the legal profession whose practitioners more fully embrace advocacy as intrinsic to professional identity, suggesting that roles are difficult to engineer or impose. Collaboration across public-facing professions like medicine and law creates opportunities to reimagine public advocacy, to identify the skills required to do it well and to refresh educational strategies.
Health advocacy: A gulf between instruction and practice

Amninder Dhatt,Mojan Fazelipour,Tom Sun,Arwa Nemir,Kerry Wilbur

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2024.01.001

Abstract:Background: Systematic ways to teach health advocacy, an educational outcome for pharmacy graduates, is lacking. We developed a workshop to facilitate understanding and application of a novel structured framework for health advocacy and explored how pharmacy students enacted opportunities for health advocacy during subsequent outpatient experiential training. Educational activity and setting: A two-hour workshop was introduced for year 2 students in 2019. Its content was organized around a health advocacy framework. With patient and faculty facilitators, students worked through examples characterized into the framework's four quadrants: 1) shared advocacy "with patients" at the individual- or 2) systems-level and 3) directed advocacy "for patients" at the individual-or 4) systems-level. We then conducted a longitudinal diary study asking pharmacy students (N = 23) to reflect on opportunities to practice health advocacy skills in community pharmacy practice. A systematic, multi-coder reflexive thematic analysis of diary entries was employed. Findings: Pharmacy students did not express a fulsome view of patient health advocacy and mischaracterized self-reported practice examples into inappropriate categories of the health advocacy framework. Most overemphasized usual pharmacist care as acts of health advocacy. No systems-level activities were undertaken, although isolated episodes of shared advocacy with patients were identified. Summary: Lasting impacts of a health advocacy workshop in our pharmacy curriculum were not widely apparent. While longer training periods in community pharmacy practice may yield more opportunities to develop and enact this role, gaps in student conceptualization of health advocacy and inabilities to practically observe and exercise system-level advocacy are ultimately problematic for patient care.
Abstract B112: Empowering cancer advocates: Evaluating the impact of a comprehensive training program

Manisha Salinas,Monica Albertie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-b112

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:The Cancer Advocacy Training Program aimed to enhance participants' knowledge, skills, and confidence in cancer advocacy, particularly addressing disparities in cancer health outcomes. This evaluation assesses the program's impact through pre- and post-training survey comparisons. The program included 25 participants from various states and focused on comprehensive training. Surveys measured changes in knowledge, attitudes, self-perceived skills, and confidence. Results showed that accurate identification of cancer's main categories increased from 83% to 96%, and awareness of the NCI's mammogram recommendations rose from 70% to 96%. Recognition of the root causes of health disparities remained at 100%, and belief in the inclusivity of cancer advocacy roles was consistently high. Understanding of trust dynamics in advocacy increased by 50%, and recognition of essential political advocacy components improved by 14%. Specific learning outcomes indicated consistent identification of research advocates, a 23% increase in knowledge of strategic funding sources, a 31% improvement in understanding health communication audiences, a 19% rise in awareness of patient advocacy benefits, and a 13% increase in comprehension of informed consent. Confidence in advocacy skills also saw significant improvements. "Extremely confident" participants increased to 33% in problem-solving, adaptability, and communication with stakeholders. Confidence in fundraising and partnership building rose to 19%, evaluation of advocacy outcomes to 24%, identifying key issues to 29%, presentation skills to 33%, and using digital tools to 29%. Self-efficacy results demonstrated notable gains: confidence in solving difficult problems related to cancer advocacy increased with participants reporting "extremely confident" rising from 11% to 33%. Confidence in adaptability under stress improved significantly, with "extremely confident" participants rising from 11% to 33%. Effective communication with stakeholders saw a significant increase, with "extremely confident" participants rising from 17% to 33%. Fundraising and partnership-building confidence increased from 6% to 19%, and confidence in evaluating advocacy outcomes improved, with "extremely confident" participants rising from 6% to 24%. The program effectively enhanced participants' knowledge, attitudes, and advocacy skills, integrating theoretical and practical learning. Gains in confidence across problem-solving, adaptability, and communication skills underline the program's success in preparing participants for real-world advocacy. Participant feedback confirmed the program's relevance and efficacy, suggesting future iterations should emphasize diversity in advocacy and deepen content on key topics. This program serves as a valuable model for empowering cancer advocates and addresses the critical need for targeted training to reduce cancer health disparities. Citation Format: Manisha Salinas, Monica Albertie. Empowering cancer advocates: Evaluating the impact of a comprehensive training program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr B112.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Overcoming barriers in equitable care delivery for women with gynecologic cancers: Outcomes and analysis from an educational program on health equity.

Jerfiz D. Constanzo,Lauren S. Prescott,Shannon Neville Westin,Ritu Salani,Eva Y. Pan,Maria Avila-Wallace,Hye Sook Chon,Kristen M. Rosenthal,Ebony R. Hoskins,Eloise Chapman-Davis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e17581

IF: 45.3

2024-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e17581 Background: Despite advances in gynecologic cancer treatment, patients of color disproportionally face barriers to equitable care. Healthcare professional (HCP) surveys can help uncover where practice gaps remain. Here, we report results from surveys administered to HCPs during and after participation in CME/CE education on promoting health equity via incorporation of best practices and facilitating patient resources. Methods: A multidisciplinary curriculum was developed to provide education on optimal and equitable care delivery including to underserved patients. From March 8, 2023, to January 19, 2024, data were collected from HCP surveys administered during and after CME education. HCP-endorsed patient resources were provided for download to all participants. Follow-up data was collected on the impact of the education on current HCP practice and remaining barriers to change practice. Results: A total of 1106 HCPs participated in the live/online program including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, among other HCPs. Only 31% of HCPs asked frequently or always provided like-patient testimonials to underserved populations, which has been demonstrated to improve enrollment on clinical trials (n = 362). Of those completing post CME education surveys (n = 431), 53% indicated a shift from awareness to agreement with best practices, 19% increased adoption or application of best practices, and 19% education helped in another way. Top barriers to change (n = 403) cited by survey completers were acceptance of proposed strategies by peers (29%), patient adherence/compliance (25%), lack of sufficient time (23%), institutional constrains (21%), and formulary restriction (18%). Among 49 HCPs who completed a survey on the applicability of telehealth, 43% indicated telehealth would increase access to care for their underserved patients of color, 33% indicated it could help monitor patients in less time, and 33% said that telehealth could be recommended for remote patients. Barriers to telehealth included aggressive disease or need of frequent monitoring (22%), patients’ lack of computer/internet access (25%), and no/deficient regulatory environment or reimbursement for telehealth (10%). In total, 289 HCPs downloaded resources tailored to improve patient–HCP communication and increase access to available financial resources. Conclusions: Our follow-up surveys during/after completion of a large, multidisciplinary, educational program on gynecologic health equity suggests improvements in HCP perceptions of health disparities and application of best practices. There remain key but addressable barriers to equitable care for underserved patients of color. Continued education is needed on the use of like-patient testimonials and telehealth to promote access, reduce costs, and provide support to vulnerable patients.

oncology
Abstract B169: Diversifying cancer patient advocate voices to eliminate health disparities

Barbara Segarra-Vazquez,Sandi Stanford,Susanne Schmidt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-b169

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Cancer patient advocates have become key members in clinical research teams and participating in decision committees at FDA, NCI, ASCO, among others. There is a low number of Latino patient advocates actively participating in the above roles lacking opportunities to share lived experiences and challenges of their communities. Being able to sit at the table where advocates can share key issues and possible solutions can help eliminate health disparities. Based on the need to increase Latinos participation as research advocates, a training program was developed. The Latino cancer patient advocate training program was design to increase knowledge and develop a community of diverse individuals who can seek opportunities to participate in research teams and decision-making committees. The training program included 15 individuals and 4 mentors who were cancer patients, survivors and caregivers and were Latinos or from Latino descent. The training included four virtual sessions, one in-person session, and attending the conference advancing the science of cancer in Latinos. Those chosen to participate received a full scholarship. The dissemination process through emails and social media included a flyer with the requirements, inclusion criteria, and a link to the application form. A total of 34 people applied, 20 were interviewed, and 15 were selected. The participants were from eleven different states and represented different types of cancer. A based questionnaire before the training, one after the training was completed by the participants. A questionnaire comparing their knowledge before and after two virtual sessions and the in-person training was completed by 93.3% participants. Self-rated knowledge scores ranged from 1 (not knowledgeable at all) to 5 (extremely knowledgeable). The average knowledge score across all questions was 2.9 (somewhat knowledgeable) before the training and 4.0 (moderately knowledgeable) after participating in the training. Participants indicated having the most knowledge about "Resources for your cancer type" (average score: 3.6 before and 4.2 after) and "Patient Advocates" (average score: 3.4 before and 4.1 after) and the least knowledge about "Opportunities and Scholarships available for Advocates" (average score: 2.1 before and 3.8 after), which had the largest increase in knowledge. In terms of satisfaction with the overall training program, all participants were very satisfied (85.7%) or satisfied (14.3%). Further, 71.4% of participants strongly agreed and 28.6% of participants agreed that they were interested in becoming a scientific/research advocate because of their participation in the training. Other outcomes after the training include participants being invited to be DoD reviewers, panelists in conferences, participation in important committees. Furthermore, participants communicate weekly with each other sharing opportunities and information. This training provided knowledge and the opportunity to feel represented as Latino patient advocate diversifying the voices of advocates. Citation Format: Barbara Segarra-Vazquez, Sandi Stanford, Susanne Schmidt. Diversifying cancer patient advocate voices to eliminate health disparities [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr B169.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Ethical and moral principles for oncology healthcare workers: A brief report from a Bioethics consortium emphasizing on need for education

Manjeshwar S Baliga,Vijaya Marakala,Lal P Madathil,Thomas George,Russell F D'souza,Princy L Palatty

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_1048_23

2024-04-29

Abstract:The medical sub-specialty of Oncology presents diverse ethical dilemmas, often challenging cancer healthcare workers with difficult-to-handle clinical scenarios that are tough from a personal and professional perspective. Making decisions on patient care in various circumstances is a defining obligation of an oncologist and those duty-based judgments entail more than just selecting the best treatment or solution. Ethics is an essential and inseparable aspect of clinical medicine and the oncologists as well as the allied health care workers are ethically committed to helping the patient, avoiding or minimizing harm, and respecting the patient's values and choices. This review provides an overview of ethics and clinical ethics and the four main ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice are stated and explained. At times there are frequently contradictions between ethical principles in patient care scenarios, especially between beneficence and autonomy. In addition, truth-telling, professionalism, empathy, and cultural competence; which are recently considered important in cancer care, are also addressed from an Indian perspective.
Pediatricians as Child Health Advocates: The Role of Advocacy Education

Nancy A. Dodson,Hina J. Talib,Qi Gao,Jaeun Choi,Susan M. Coupey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839920931494

2020-06-09

Health Promotion Practice

Abstract:In this article, we discuss the role of formal advocacy education with high-effort advocacy activities among pediatricians. We discuss the historical role of advocacy in the field of pediatrics and the changing role of advocacy education in pediatric training programs. We describe our survey of pediatricians in New York, in which we asked about a history of formal child health advocacy education, current high- and low-effort advocacy activities, perceived barriers to advocacy work, and child health advocacy issues of interest. Our findings demonstrate an association between a history of formal child health advocacy education and recent participation in high-effort advocacy activities on behalf of children’s health. We also found that practicing pediatricians were more likely to participate in high-effort advocacy work than individuals still in pediatric residency training. Our findings imply that education in child health advocacy should be considered an important part of pediatric training. Advocacy education should not only be included in residency and fellowship training programs but also made available as part of continuing medical education for pediatricians. Time for professional advocacy work should be allotted and encouraged.
Abstract B162: Building skills for authentic researcher-community collaborations: A curriculum

Tobi Cawthra,Kristen Gardner-Volle,Laura Pinsoneault,Alexis Krause,Jessica Olson,Deborah Thomas,Carol Williams,Melinda Stolley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-b162

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: Cancer incidence and mortality rates are declining in the population overall, but certain groups continue to be at increased risk of developing or dying from cancer. Cancer disparities are complex, and the root causes are a mix of genetic, behavioral, and socioeconomic factors. Many different perspectives are needed to understand cancer disparities and create better solutions. Methods: To aid community members and biomedical researchers in building skills for authentic transdisciplinary collaborations, we developed a pilot 9-month curriculum for community members (community scholars) and early/middle career basic science and clinical fellows (research scholars) to learn about cancer disparities, factors influencing disparities, communication with diverse audiences, and how to understand different perspectives. Research and community scholars are grouped to design a project that allows them to practice new skills and apply new learning. This curriculum is offered through the Medical College of Wisconsin and is part of the Community and Cancer Science Network which uses a transdisciplinary approach to address cancer disparities. To assess impact of the curriculum, scholars completed assessments throughout the program. At two points, scholars were asked to reflect upon how the curriculum impacted their understanding of cancer disparities, social determinants of health, cancer research, and if the curriculum influenced their work. Scholars also provided a self- assessment of how they perceived collaboration and their role at the start and completion of the curriculum. At the final assessment scholars answered qualitative questions to reflect on their understanding of disparities, relationships and partnerships, and developing new perspectives. Results: Three cohorts of scholars (n=32 enrolled; n=27 completed) participated in the curriculum which included didactic and experiential learning. Assessment data showed scholars were eager for collaboration but somewhat unprepared for associated challenges. However, they developed an appreciation for the time and skills needed to build partnerships with those whose perspectives differ. Importantly, scholars reported that they became more comfortable with acknowledging general gaps in their knowledge and understanding after participating in the curriculum. Scholars reported a modest increase in applying knowledge outside of the program, sharing the information with others, and identifying ways community and research can collaborate to address cancer disparities. Qualitative responses highlighted scholars' interest in continued engagement, a willingness to reflect on their own biases, and an eagerness to engage other disciplines. Discussion: The skills required to collaborate with those from different perspectives and disciplines need to be mentored and developed. This program is successful in preparing researchers and community members in understanding the complexities of transdisciplinary collaboration and preparing them to establish authentic partnerships. Citation Format: Tobi Cawthra, Kristen Gardner-Volle, Laura Pinsoneault, Alexis Krause, Jessica Olson, Deborah Thomas, Carol Williams, Melinda Stolley. Building skills for authentic researcher-community collaborations: A curriculum [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr B162.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health

[Perforation of a gastric ulcer into the left ventricle of the heart].

Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022

An unusual right coronary artery obstruction after mitral surgery.

Advocating with Community: A Community-Engaged Advocacy Curriculum for Internal Medicine Residents

How Are We Teaching Advocacy? A National Survey of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors

Advocacy Skill Development in Public Health Education Curriculum: A Pilot Study

Abstract B104: Identifying gaps in equitable cancer care: insights from US-based oncology professionals engaged in continuing medical education

Incorporating Health Policy and Advocacy Curricula Into Undergraduate Medical Education in the United States

Growth hormone for small-for-gestational-age children: short and sweet?

Physician engagement in reproductive health advocacy: findings from a mixed methods evaluation of a leadership and advocacy program

Infection from intravenous "scalp-vein" needles in a susceptible population.

Innovation in cancer policy & health systems education during hematology-oncology (HO) fellowship training: Single center experience.

Cancer Education in Poland: Current Status and Suggestions for Improvement

The courage to advocate: How two professions approach public advocacy work

Health advocacy: A gulf between instruction and practice

Abstract B112: Empowering cancer advocates: Evaluating the impact of a comprehensive training program

Overcoming barriers in equitable care delivery for women with gynecologic cancers: Outcomes and analysis from an educational program on health equity.

Abstract B169: Diversifying cancer patient advocate voices to eliminate health disparities

Ethical and moral principles for oncology healthcare workers: A brief report from a Bioethics consortium emphasizing on need for education

Pediatricians as Child Health Advocates: The Role of Advocacy Education

Abstract B162: Building skills for authentic researcher-community collaborations: A curriculum