Search

Sponsorship describes a set of actions wherein an influential champion (sponsor) uses their position to actively support a colleagues career by helping them gain visibility, recognition, and/or positions. There is growing awareness of the importance of sponsorship for career advancement in academic medicine, particularly for women and those who are historically underrepresented and excluded in medicine (UIM). This scoping review examines the current landscape of evidence, and knowledge gaps, on sponsorship as it relates to career advancement in academic medicine for women and UIM faculty. We searched peer-reviewed literature in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (WoS) over the past 50 years (from 1973 through July 2023). Sixteen studies were included in the final review. We found relative consensus on sponsorship definition and value to career advancement. Heterogeneity in study design limited our ability to directly compare study outcomes. All included studies focused on gender differences in sponsorship: two of four quantitative studies found men were more likely to receive sponsorship, one reported no gender differences, and one was insufficiently powered. All but one of the qualitative studies reported gender differences, with women less likely to access or be identified for sponsorship. The mixed-methods studies suggested sponsorship may vary by career stage. Only two studies analyzed sponsorship for UIM populations. The existing data are inconclusive regarding best ways to measure and assess sponsorship, what institutional support (e.g., structured programs, formal recognition, or incentives for sponsorship) should look like, and at what career stage sponsorship is most important. Addressing this knowledge gap will be critically important for understanding what sponsorship best practices, if any, should be used to promote equity in career advancement in academic medicine. We advocate for commitment at the institutional and national levels to develop new infrastructure for transparently and equitably supporting women and UIM in career advancement.

BACKGROUND: Women and underrepresented in medicine and the health sciences (URiM) faculty face inequities in advancement. Career sponsorship may be a remedy. Few studies have described sponsorship in academic medicine and none across an institution. OBJECTIVE: To examine faculty awareness, experiences, and perceptions of sponsorship at a large academic health center. DESIGN: Anonymous online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Faculty with a ≥50% appointment. MAIN MEASURES: The survey contained 31 Likert, multiple-choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions about familiarity with the concept of sponsorship; experience of having or being a sponsor; receipt of specific sponsorship activities; sponsorship impact and satisfaction; mentorship and sponsorship co-occurrence; and perception of inequities. Open-ended questions were analyzed using content analysis. KEY RESULTS: Thirty-one percent of the surveyed faculty (903/2900) responded of whom 53% (477/903) were women and 10% (95/903) were URiM. Familiarity with sponsorship was higher among assistant (91%, 269/894) and associate (182/894; 64%) professors versus full professors (38%, 329/894); women (67%, 319/488) versus men (62%, 169/488); and URiM (77%, 66/517) versus non-URiM faculty (55%, 451/517). A majority had a personal sponsor (528/691; 76%) during their career and were satisfied with their sponsorship (64%, 532/828). However, when responses from faculty of different professorial ranks were stratified by gender and URiM identity, we observed possible cohort effects. Furthermore, 55% (398/718) of respondents perceived that women received less sponsorship than men and 46% (312/672) that URiM faculty received less than their peers. We identified seven qualitative themes: sponsorship importance, growing awareness and change, institutional biases and deficiencies, groups getting less sponsorship, people with sponsorship power, conflation with mentorship, and potential for negative impact. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of respondents at a large academic health center reported sponsorship familiarity, receipt, and satisfaction. Yet many perceived persistent institutional biases and the need for systematic change to improve sponsorship transparency, equity, and impact.

Purpose: Asian and Latinx individuals have a high burden of untreated depression. Under-recognition of depressive symptoms may contribute to existing disparities in depression treatment. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to determine whether physicians recognize and treat depressive symptoms for Chinese and Latinx patients during routine primary care visits. Methods: We analyzed data from 1171 Chinese and Latinx patients who were interviewed within 1 week after a primary care visit in a large academic practice, which had not yet implemented universal depression screening. We included participants with depressive symptoms (defined as a Patient Health Questionaire-2 score ≥3) and no prior history of depression (N=118). We investigated whether patients perceived having a mental health need in the prior year and conducted chart reviews to assess provider recognition of depressive symptoms, defined as documentation of symptoms, antidepressant initiation, or mental health referral within 30 days of the visit. We further examined differences by race/ethnicity and language preference. Results: Among the 118 patients with depressive symptoms and no prior depression diagnosis (mean age 68), 71 (61%) reported a mental health need in the prior 12 months; however, providers recognized depressive symptoms in only 8/118 patients (7%). The number of patients with recognized symptoms was small across race/ethnicity and language preference groups and we found no significant differences. Conclusion: Physicians recognized and documented depressive symptoms for 1 in 10 Chinese and Latinx patients during routine primary care visits. Targeted efforts are needed to address under-recognition of symptoms and improve depression care for these populations.

This Perspective presents a case study of multidimensional clinical transformation in an academic general internal medicine practice. In the face of increasing internal and external pressures, health systems and individual medical practices have pursued multiple strategies to improve quality, patient experience, and efficiency, while reducing staff and provider stress and burnout. We describe a Lean-informed approach that emphasizes the importance of organizational alignment in goals, evidence-based problem solving, and leadership behaviors to support a culture of continuous improvement. Our aim in this Perspective is to provide a real-world example of a feasible process for the planning, preparation, and execution of effective transformation, and to present lessons that may be useful to other academic health center practices seeking to develop innovative models to achieve the quadruple aim.

In order to evaluate mortality predictions based on boosted trees, this retrospective study uses electronic medical record data from three academic health centers for inpatients 18 years or older with at least one observation of each vital sign. Predictions were made 12, 24, and 48 hours before death. Models fit to training data from each institution were evaluated using hold-out test data from the same institution, and from the other institutions. Gradient-boosted trees (GBT) were compared to regularized logistic regression (LR) predictions, support vector machine (SVM) predictions, quick Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). For training and testing GBT on data from the same institution, the average AUROCs were 0.96, 0.95, and 0.94 across institutional test sets for 12-, 24-, and 48-hour predictions, respectively. When trained and tested on data from different hospitals, GBT AUROCs achieved up to 0.98, 0.96, and 0.96, for 12-, 24-, and 48-hour predictions, respectively. Average AUROC for 48-hour predictions for LR, SVM, MEWS, and qSOFA were 0.85, 0.79, 0.86 and 0.82, respectively. GBT predictions may help identify patients who would benefit from increased clinical care.

BackgroundMentorship plays an essential role in enhancing the success of junior faculty. Previous evaluation tools focused on specific types of mentors or mentees. The main objective was to develop and provide validity evidence for a Mentor Evaluation Tool (MET) to assess the effectiveness of one-on-one mentoring for faculty in the academic health sciences.MethodsEvidence was collected for the validity domains of content, internal structure and relationship to other variables. The 13 item MET was tested for internal structure evidence with 185 junior faculty from Schools of Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy. Finally, the MET was studied for additional validity evidence by prospectively enrolling mentees of three different groups of faculty (faculty nominated for, or winners of, a lifetime achievement in mentoring award; faculty graduates of a mentor training program; and faculty mentors not in either of the other two groups) at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) and asking them to rate their mentors using the MET. Mentors and mentees were clinicians, educators and/or researchers.ResultsThe 13 MET items mapped well to the five mentoring domains and six competencies described in the literature. The standardized Cronbach's coefficient alpha was 0.96. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a single factor (CFI = 0.89, SRMR = 0.05). The three mentor groups did not differ in the single overall assessment item (P = 0.054) or mean MET score (P = 0.288), before or after adjusting for years of mentoring. The mentorship score means were relatively high for all three groups.ConclusionsThe Mentor Evaluation Tool demonstrates evidence of validity for research, clinical, educational or career mentors in academic health science careers. However, MET did not distinguish individuals nominated as outstanding mentors from other mentors. MET validity evidence can be studied further with mentor-mentee pairs and to follow prospectively the rating of mentors before and after a mentorship training program.

Universal depression screening in adolescent primary care often encompasses questions about suicide risk. We conducted a retrospective chart review of well-child visits where adolescents (ages 13-17.9) had endorsed self-injurious thoughts and behaviors or suicidal ideation. The goal was to investigate primary care providers' follow-up actions, including documentation, further assessment, and referrals. Over 3-quarters of the progress notes showed evidence of further assessment, and two-thirds documented same-day actions, including mental health referrals, emergency department referrals, safety plans, medication changes, primary-care follow-up, and talking to parents. Actions varied by depression severity. Cases without interventions often had justifications. Owing to the variety of possible meanings and severity underlying positive screens, providers implemented an array of interventions, using clinical judgment to tailor actions to patients' individual needs and preferences. From these observations, we propose that standardized guidelines for suicide risk screening and follow-up should involve a clinical assessment and individualized treatment planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundCardiovascular diseases are among the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in sub-Saharan Africa, including Zambia, where cardiovascular diseases account for 8% of the mortality rates. Despite an increasing number of cardiovascular disease-related studies in Zambia, qualitative studies exploring how cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors are understood in the socioeconomic and cultural contexts are still few. This study, therefore, aimed to analyze the beliefs, perceptions, and behaviors related to cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors among the local residents of Zambia.MethodsThis qualitative study was conducted from August to September 2014 among healthy residents aged 40 years and above in a rural community in Mumbwa District. We investigated the beliefs, perceptions, and behaviors related to cardiovascular diseases and their potential risk factors in the sociocultural context of Zambia by conducting in-depth interviews and focus group interviews. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis with investigator triangulation.ResultsWe conducted 34 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group interviews with 27 males and 40 females. Most participants were aware of the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases around them and correctly identified hypertension, excessive salt, sugar, and cooking oil intakes, poor quality cooking oil, consumption of meat or vegetables contaminated with chemicals, obesity, stress ["thinking too much"], lack of physical exercise, and heredity as potential risk factors of cardiovascular diseases, while smoking and alcohol were mentioned by only a few participants. However, they claimed that many of these risk factors were difficult to avoid due to ingrained taste preferences for high salt and sugar, increasingly busy lives that force them to use cooking oil to reduce preparation time, cultural preference for big body size or fatness, especially for women, stigmatized body image attached to HIV, stressful life or life events related to poverty, and financial barriers to affording quality foods and healthcare services. Limited health screening opportunities and the negative impact of HIV-related stigma on health-seeking behavior also emerged as important risk factors for cardiovascular diseases.ConclusionsThis study revealed that participants are relatively well aware of cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors. However, they engage in high-risk health behaviors, due to ingrained taste preferences, limited knowledge, and unavoidable socioeconomic and cultural circumstances. Results suggest that prevention interventions addressing cardiovascular diseases in rural Zambia should target gaps in knowledge and socioeconomic and cultural barriers.

IntroductionSeveral methods have been developed to electronically monitor patients for severe sepsis, but few provide predictive capabilities to enable early intervention; furthermore, no severe sepsis prediction systems have been previously validated in a randomised study. We tested the use of a machine learning-based severe sepsis prediction system for reductions in average length of stay and in-hospital mortality rate.MethodsWe conducted a randomised controlled clinical trial at two medical-surgical intensive care units at the University of California, San Francisco Medical Center, evaluating the primary outcome of average length of stay, and secondary outcome of in-hospital mortality rate from December 2016 to February 2017. Adult patients (18+) admitted to participating units were eligible for this factorial, open-label study. Enrolled patients were assigned to a trial arm by a random allocation sequence. In the control group, only the current severe sepsis detector was used; in the experimental group, the machine learning algorithm (MLA) was also used. On receiving an alert, the care team evaluated the patient and initiated the severe sepsis bundle, if appropriate. Although participants were randomly assigned to a trial arm, group assignments were automatically revealed for any patients who received MLA alerts.ResultsOutcomes from 75 patients in the control and 67 patients in the experimental group were analysed. Average length of stay decreased from 13.0 days in the control to 10.3 days in the experimental group (p=0.042). In-hospital mortality decreased by 12.4 percentage points when using the MLA (p=0.018), a relative reduction of 58.0%. No adverse events were reported during this trial.ConclusionThe MLA was associated with improved patient outcomes. This is the first randomised controlled trial of a sepsis surveillance system to demonstrate statistically significant differences in length of stay and in-hospital mortality.Trial registrationNCT03015454.

BackgroundThere has been a global increase in HIV infection in persons 50 years of age and older. This group is at risk for development of chronic illness that may be exacerbated by socio-behavioral risk factors such as smoking, unhealthy alcohol use, and sedentary lifestyle. However, socio-behavioral risk factors in this older HIV infected population are not well described. The current study aims to describe and document factors related to alcohol use, tobacco smoking, and physical exercise in older adults living with HIV (OALHIV).MethodsThis cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted between August and September 2015, and enrolled HIV-infected participants aged 50 years and older from 12 community hospitals in Chiang Mai Province, Northern Thailand.ResultsOf the 364 participants recruited in the study, 57.1% were female, and 67.3% were between 50-59 years of age. Respectively, 15.1%, 59.1%, and 18.7% were current smokers, currently engaged in physical exercises, and reported ever drank alcohol in the past year. 22.1% of those who drank alcohol reported experience of heavy episodic drinking. Male gender was one of the strongest predictors of ever drank alcohol in the past year (AOR, 4.66; CI, 2.28-9.49; P 20,000 Baht: AOR, 5.34; CI, 1.28-22.25; P = 0.021). Lower educational level was associated with decreased odds of physical exercises (no education versus secondary and higher: AOR, 0.22; CI, 0.08-0.55; P = 0.001).ConclusionSmoking and alcohol use is common among OALHIV, with a substantial proportion not engaging in physical exercises. Interventions for OALHIV should particularly target males and those of lower socio-economic status to deter smoking and alcohol use and to promote physical exercises.

© 2014, The Author(s).Thailand has undergone rapid modernization with implications for changes in sexual norms. We investigated sexual behavior and attitudes across generations and gender among a probability sample of the general population of Nonthaburi p

BackgroundDue to the clinical challenges of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), we evaluated the efficacy of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) relative to a structurally equivalent active comparison condition as adjuncts to treatment-as-usual (TAU) pharmacotherapy in TRD.MethodsThis single-site, randomized controlled trial compared 8-week courses of MBCT and the Health Enhancement Program (HEP), comprising physical fitness, music therapy and nutritional education, as adjuncts to TAU pharmacotherapy for outpatient adults with TRD. The primary outcome was change in depression severity, measured by percent reduction in the total score on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17), with secondary depression indicators of treatment response and remission.ResultsWe enrolled 173 adults; mean length of a current depressive episode was 6.8 years (SD = 8.9). At the end of 8 weeks of treatment, a multivariate analysis showed that relative to the HEP condition, the MBCT condition was associated with a significantly greater mean percent reduction in the HAM-D17 (36.6 vs. 25.3%; p = 0.01) and a significantly higher rate of treatment responders (30.3 vs. 15.3%; p = 0.03). Although numerically superior for MBCT than for HEP, the rates of remission did not significantly differ between treatments (22.4 vs. 13.9%; p = 0.15). In these models, state anxiety, perceived stress and the presence of personality disorder had adverse effects on outcomes.ConclusionsMBCT significantly decreased depression severity and improved treatment response rates at 8 weeks but not remission rates. MBCT appears to be a viable adjunct in the management of TRD.

ObjectiveTo identify factors associated with participant consent to record visits; to estimate effects of recording on patient-clinician interactions.MethodsSecondary analysis of data from a randomized trial studying communication about depression; participants were asked for optional consent to audio record study visits. Multiple logistic regression was used to model likelihood of patient and clinician consent. Multivariable regression and propensity score analyses were used to estimate effects of audio recording on 6 dependent variables: discussion of depressive symptoms, preventive health, and depression diagnosis; depression treatment recommendations; visit length; visit difficulty.ResultsOf 867 visits involving 135 primary care clinicians, 39% were recorded. For clinicians, only working in academic settings (P=0.003) and having worked longer at their current practice (P=0.02) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. For patients, white race (P=0.002) and diabetes (P=0.03) were associated with increased likelihood of consent. Neither multivariable regression nor propensity score analyses revealed any significant effects of recording on the variables examined.ConclusionFew clinician or patient characteristics were significantly associated with consent. Audio recording had no significant effect on any of the 6 dependent variables examined.Practice implicationsBenefits of recording clinic visits likely outweigh the risks of bias in this setting.

Background"Difficult visits" are common in primary care and may contribute to primary care provider (PCP) career dissatisfaction and burnout. Patient requests occur in approximately half of primary care visits and may be a source of clinician-patient miscommunication or conflict, contributing to perceived visit difficulty.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine associations between types of patient requests and PCP-perceived visit difficulty.DesignThis was an observational study, nested in a multicenter randomized trial of depression engagement interventions.SubjectsWe included 824 patient visits within 135 PCP practices in Northern California occurring from June 2010 to March 2012.Main measuresPCP-perceived visit difficulty was quantified using a three-item scale (relative visit difficulty, amount of effort required, and amount of time required; Cronbach's α = 0.81). Using linear regression, the difficulty scale (score range 0-2 from least to most difficult) was modeled as a function of: patient requests for diagnostics tests, pain medications, and specialist referrals; PCP perception of likely depression or likely substance abuse; patient sociodemographics, comorbidity, depression; PCP characteristics and practice setting.ResultsPatients requested diagnostic tests, pain medications, and specialist referrals in 37.2, 20.0 and 30.0 % of visits, respectively. After adjustment for patient medical and psychiatric complexity, perceived difficulty was significantly higher when patients requested diagnostic tests [parameter estimate (PE) 0.11, (95 % CI: 0.03, 0.20)] but not when patients requested pain medications [PE -0.04 (95 % CI: -0.15, 0.08)] or referrals [PE 0.04 (95 % CI: -0.07, 0.25)].ConclusionsPCP-perceived visit difficulty is associated with patient requests for diagnostic tests, but not requests for pain medications or specialist referrals. In this era of "choosing wisely," PCPs may be challenged to respond to diagnostic test requests in an evidence-based manner, while maintaining the provider-patient relationship and PCP career satisfaction.

© 2015 Sakushima et al.; licensee BioMed Central.Background: Physician-scientists play key roles in biomedical research across the globe, yet prior studies have found that it is increasingly difficult to recruit and retain physician-scientists in research

BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is the leading cause of disability in the developed world, yet broadly effective treatments remain elusive. Up to 40% of patients with depression are unresponsive to at least two trials of antidepressant medication and thus have "treatment-resistant depression" (TRD). There is an urgent need for cost-effective, non-pharmacologic, evidence-based treatments for TRD. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) is an effective treatment for relapse prevention and residual depression in major depression, but has not been previously studied in patients with TRD in a large randomized trial.Methods/designThe purpose of this study was to evaluate whether MBCT is an effective augmentation of antidepressants for adults with MDD who failed to respond to standard pharmacotherapy. MBCT was compared to an active control condition, the Health-Enhancement Program (HEP), which incorporates physical activity, functional movement, music therapy and nutritional advice. HEP was designed as a comparator condition for mindfulness-based interventions to control for non-specific effects. Originally investigated in a non-clinical sample to promote stress reduction, HEP was adapted for a depressed population for this study. Individuals age 18 and older with moderate to severe TRD, who failed to respond to at least two trials of antidepressants in the current episode, were recruited to participate. All participants were taking antidepressants (Treatment as usual; TAU) at the time of enrollment. After signing an informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to either MBCT or HEP condition. Participants were followed for 1 year and assessed at weeks 1-7, 8, 24, 36, and 52. Change in depression severity, rate of treatment response and remission after 8 weeks were the primary outcomes measured by the clinician-rated Hamilton Depression Severity Rating (HAM-D) 17-item scale. The participant-rated Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomology (QIDS-SR) 16-item scale was the secondary outcome measure of depression severity, response, and remission.DiscussionTreatment-resistant depression entails significant morbidity and has few effective treatments. We studied the effect of augmenting antidepressant medication with MBCT, compared with a HEP control, for patients with TRD. Analyses will focus on clinician and patient assessment of depression, participants' clinical global impression change, employment and social functioning scores and quality of life and satisfaction ratings.Trial registrationClincalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01021254.

BackgroundUse of brief depression symptom measures for identifying or screening cases may help to address depression undertreatment, but whether it also leads to diagnosis and treatment of patients with few or no symptoms-a group unlikely to have major depression or benefit from antidepressants-is unknown. We examined the associations of use of a brief depression symptom measure with depression diagnosis and antidepressant recommendation and prescription among patients with few or no depression symptoms.MethodsWe conducted exploratory observational analyses of data from a randomized trial of depression engagement interventions conducted in primary care offices in California. Analyses focused on participants scoring

BackgroundDespite improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of depression, primary care provider (PCP) discussion regarding suicidal thoughts among patients with depressive symptoms remains low.ObjectiveTo determine whether a targeted depression public service announcement (PSA) video or an individually tailored interactive multimedia computer program (IMCP) leads to increased primary care provider (PCP) discussion of suicidal thoughts in patients with elevated risk for clinical depression when compared to an attention control.DesignRandomized control trial at five different healthcare systems in Northern California; two academic, two Veterans Affairs (VA), and one group-model health maintenance organization (HMO).ParticipantsEight-hundred sixty-seven participants, with mean age 51.7; 43.9% women, 43.4% from a racial/ethnic minority group.InterventionThe PSA was targeted to gender and socio-economic status, and designed to encourage patients to seek depression care or request information regarding depression. The IMCP was an individually tailored interactive health message designed to activate patients to discuss possible depressive symptoms. The attention control was a sleep hygiene video.Main measuresClinician reported discussion of suicidal thoughts. Analyses were stratified by depressive symptom level (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] score

ImportanceEncouraging primary care patients to address depression symptoms and care with clinicians could improve outcomes but may also result in unnecessary treatment.ObjectiveTo determine whether a depression engagement video (DEV) or a tailored interactive multimedia computer program (IMCP) improves initial depression care compared with a control without increasing unnecessary antidepressant prescribing.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized clinical trial comparing DEV, IMCP, and control among 925 adult patients treated by 135 primary care clinicians (603 patients with depression and 322 patients without depression, defined by Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] score) conducted from June 2010 through March 2012 at 7 primary care clinical sites in California.InterventionsDEV targeted to sex and income, an IMCP tailored to individual patient characteristics, and a sleep hygiene video (control).Main outcomes and measuresAmong depressed patients, superiority assessment of the composite measure of patient-reported antidepressant drug recommendation, mental health referral, or both (primary outcome); depression at 12-week follow-up, measured by the PHQ-8 (secondary outcome). Among nondepressed patients, noninferiority assessment of clinician- and patient-reported antidepressant drug recommendation (primary outcomes) with a noninferiority margin of 3.5%. Analyses were cluster adjusted.ResultsOf the 925 eligible patients, 867 were included in the primary analysis (depressed, 559; nondepressed, 308). Among depressed patients, rates of achieving the primary outcome were 17.5% for DEV, 26% for IMCP, and 16.3% for control (DEV vs control, 1.1 [95% CI, -6.7 to 8.9], P = .79; IMCP vs control, 9.9 [95% CI, 1.6 to 18.2], P = .02). There were no effects on PHQ-8 measured depression score at the 12-week follow-up: DEV vs control, -0.2 (95% CI, -1.2 to 0.8); IMCP vs control,  0.9 (95% CI, -0.1 to 1.9). Among nondepressed patients, clinician-reported antidepressant prescribing in the DEV and IMCP groups was noninferior to control (mean percentage point difference [PPD]: DEV vs control, -2.2 [90% CI, -8.0 to 3.49], P = .0499 for noninferiority; IMCP vs control, -3.3 [90% CI, -9.1 to 2.4], P = .02 for noninferiority); patient-reported antidepressant recommendation did not achieve noninferiority (mean PPD: DEV vs control,  0.9 [90% CI, -4.9 to 6.7], P = .23 for noninferiority; IMCP vs control,  0.3 [90% CI, -5.1 to 5.7], P = .16 for noninferiority).Conclusions and relevanceA tailored IMCP increased clinician recommendations for antidepressant drugs, a mental health referral, or both among depressed patients but had no effect on mental health at the 12-week follow-up. The possibility that the IMCP and DEV increased patient-reported clinician recommendations for an antidepressant drug among nondepressed patients could not be excluded.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01144104.

Abstract Background Depression in primary care is common, yet this costly and disabling condition remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Persisting gaps in the primary care of depression are due in part to patients’ reluctance to bring depressive symptoms to the attention of their primary care clinician and, when depression is diagnosed, to accept initial treatment for the condition. Both targeted and tailored communication strategies offer promise for fomenting discussion and reducing barriers to appropriate initial treatment of depression. Methods/design The Activating Messages to Enhance Primary Care Practice (AMEP2) Study is a stratified randomized controlled trial comparing two computerized multimedia patient interventions --- one targeted (to patient gender and income level) and one tailored (to level of depressive symptoms, visit agenda, treatment preferences, depression causal attributions, communication self-efficacy and stigma)--- and an attention control. AMEP2 consists of two linked sub-studies, one focusing on patients with significant depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] scores ≥ 5), the other on patients with few or no depressive symptoms (PHQ-9

PurposeTo explore the mentor-mentee relationship with a focus on determining the characteristics of effective mentors and mentees and understanding the factors influencing successful and failed mentoring relationships.MethodThe authors completed a qualitative study through the Departments of Medicine at the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine and the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine between March 2010 and January 2011. They conducted individual, semistructured interviews with faculty members from different career streams and ranks and analyzed transcripts of the interviews, drawing on grounded theory.ResultsThe authors completed interviews with 54 faculty members and identified a number of themes, including the characteristics of effective mentors and mentees, actions of effective mentors, characteristics of successful and failed mentoring relationships, and tactics for successful mentoring relationships. Successful mentoring relationships were characterized by reciprocity, mutual respect, clear expectations, personal connection, and shared values. Failed mentoring relationships were characterized by poor communication, lack of commitment, personality differences, perceived (or real) competition, conflicts of interest, and the mentor's lack of experience.ConclusionsSuccessful mentorship is vital to career success and satisfaction for both mentors and mentees. Yet challenges continue to inhibit faculty members from receiving effective mentorship. Given the importance of mentorship on faculty members' careers, future studies must address the association between a failed mentoring relationship and a faculty member's career success, how to assess different approaches to mediating failed mentoring relationships, and how to evaluate strategies for effective mentorship throughout a faculty member's career.

Mentorship is crucial for academic productivity and advancement for clinical and translational (CT) science faculty. However, little is known about the long-term effects of mentor training programs. The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), Clinical and Translational Science Institute launched a Mentor Development Program (MDP) in 2007 for CT faculty. We report on an evaluation of the first three cohorts of graduates from the MDP. In 2010, all Mentors in Training (MITs) who completed the MDP from 2007 to 2009 (n= 38) were asked to complete an evaluation of their mentoring skills and knowledge; all MITs (100%) completed the evaluation. Two-thirds of MDP graduates reported that they often apply knowledge, attitudes, or skills obtained in the MDP to their mentoring. Nearly all graduates (97%) considered being a mentor important to their career satisfaction. Graduates were also asked about the MDPs impact on specific mentoring skills; 95% agreed that the MDP helped them to become a better mentor and to focus their mentoring goals. We also describe a number of new initiatives to support mentoring at UCSF that have evolved from the MDP. To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation of the long-term impact of a mentor training program for CT researchers.

Mentorship is crucial for academic productivity and advancement for clinical and translational (CT) science faculty. However, little is known about the long-term effects of mentor training programs. The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), Clinical and Translational Science Institute launched a Mentor Development Program (MDP) in 2007 for CT faculty. We report on an evaluation of the first three cohorts of graduates from the MDP. In 2010, all Mentors in Training (MITs) who completed the MDP from 2007 to 2009 (n= 38) were asked to complete an evaluation of their mentoring skills and knowledge; all MITs (100%) completed the evaluation. Two-thirds of MDP graduates reported that they often apply knowledge, attitudes, or skills obtained in the MDP to their mentoring. Nearly all graduates (97%) considered being a mentor important to their career satisfaction. Graduates were also asked about the MDP's impact on specific mentoring skills; 95% agreed that the MDP helped them to become a better mentor and to focus their mentoring goals. We also describe a number of new initiatives to support mentoring at UCSF that have evolved from the MDP. To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation of the long-term impact of a mentor training program for CT researchers.

Abstract Background Japan provides universal health insurance to all legal residents. Prior research has suggested that immigrants to Japan disproportionately lack health insurance coverage, but no prior study has used rigorous methodology to examine this issue among Latin American immigrants in Japan. The aim of our study, therefore, was to assess the pattern of health insurance coverage and predictors of uninsurance among documented Latin American immigrants in Japan. Methods We used a cross sectional, mixed method approach using a probability proportional to estimated size sampling procedure. Of 1052 eligible Latin American residents mapped through extensive fieldwork in selected clusters, 400 immigrant residents living in Nagahama City, Japan were randomly selected for our study. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a structured questionnaire developed from qualitative interviews. Results Our response rate was 70.5% (n = 282). Respondents were mainly from Brazil (69.9%), under 40 years of age (64.5%) and had lived in Japan for 9.45 years (SE 0.44; median, 8.00). We found a high prevalence of uninsurance (19.8%) among our sample compared with the estimated national average of 1.3% in the general population. Among the insured full time workers (n = 209), 55.5% were not covered by the Employee's Health Insurance. Many immigrants cited financial trade-offs as the main reasons for uninsurance. Lacking of knowledge that health insurance is mandatory in Japan, not having a chronic disease, and having one or no children were strong predictors of uninsurance. Conclusions Lack of health insurance for immigrants in Japan is a serious concern for this population as well as for the Japanese health care system. Appropriate measures should be taken to facilitate access to health insurance for this vulnerable population.

The presence of hope has been found to influence an individual's ability to cope with stressful situations. The objective of this study is to evaluate the relationship between medical errors, hope and burnout among practicing physicians using validated metrics. Prospective cohort study was conducted among hospital based physicians practicing in Japan (N = 836). Measures included the validated Burnout Scale, self-assessment of medical errors and Herth Hope Index (HHI). The main outcome measure was the frequency of self-perceived medical errors, and Poisson regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between hope and medical error. A total of 361 errors were reported in 836 physician-years. We observed a significant association between hope and self-report of medical errors. Compared with the lowest tertile category of HHI, incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of self-perceived medical errors of physicians in the highest category were 0.44 (95%CI, 0.34 to 0.58) and 0.54 (95%CI, 0.42 to 0.70) respectively, for the 2(nd) and 3(rd) tertile. In stratified analysis by hope score, among physicians with a low hope score, those who experienced higher burnout reported higher incidence of errors; physicians with high hope scores did not report high incidences of errors, even if they experienced high burnout. Self-perceived medical errors showed a strong association with physicians' hope, and hope modified the association between physicians' burnout and self-perceived medical errors.

PurposeDepression is common in primary care but often under-treated. Personal experiences with depression can affect adherence to therapy, but the effect of vicarious experience is unstudied. We sought to evaluate the association between a patient's vicarious experiences with depression (those of friends or family) and treatment preferences for depressive symptoms.MethodsWe sampled 1054 English and/or Spanish speaking adult subjects from July through December 2008, randomly selected from the 2008 California Behavioral Risk Factor Survey System, regarding depressive symptoms and treatment preferences. We then constructed a unidimensional scale using item analysis that reflects attitudes about antidepressant pharmacotherapy. This became the dependent variable in linear regression analyses to examine the association between vicarious experiences and treatment preferences for depressive symptoms.ResultsOur sample was 68% female, 91% white, and 13% Hispanic. Age ranged from 18-94 years. Mean PHQ-9 score was 4.3; 14.5% of respondents had a PHQ-9 score >9.0, consistent with active depressive symptoms. Analyses controlling for current depression symptoms and socio-demographic factors found that in patients both with (coefficient 1.08, p = 0.03) and without (coefficient 0.77, p = 0.03) a personal history of depression, having a vicarious experience (family and friend, respectively) with depression is associated with a more favorable attitude towards antidepressant medications.ConclusionsPatients with vicarious experiences of depression express more acceptance of pharmacotherapy. Conversely, patients lacking vicarious experiences of depression have more negative attitudes towards antidepressants. When discussing treatment with patients, clinicians should inquire about vicarious experiences of depression. This information may identify patients at greater risk for non-adherence and lead to more tailored patient-specific education about treatment.

BackgroundTo determine the characteristics associated with having a mentor, the association of mentoring with self-efficacy, and the content of mentor-mentee interactions at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), we conducted a baseline assessment prior to implementing a comprehensive faculty mentoring program.MethodWe surveyed all prospective junior faculty mentees at UCSF. Mentees completed a web-based, 38-item survey including an assessment of self-efficacy and a needs assessment. We used descriptive and inferential statistics to determine the association between having a mentor and gender, ethnicity, faculty series, and self-efficacy.ResultsOur respondents (n=464, 56%) were 53% female, 62% white, and 7% from underrepresented minority groups. More than half of respondents (n=319) reported having a mentor. There were no differences in having a mentor based on gender or ethnicity (p>or=0.05). Clinician educator faculty with more teaching and patient care responsibilities were statistically significantly less likely to have a mentor compared with faculty in research intensive series (p

BackgroundEditorial peer review is universally used but little studied. We examined the relationship between external reviewers' recommendations and the editorial outcome of manuscripts undergoing external peer-review at the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM).Methodology/principal findingsWe examined reviewer recommendations and editors' decisions at JGIM between 2004 and 2008. For manuscripts undergoing peer review, we calculated chance-corrected agreement among reviewers on recommendations to reject versus accept or revise. Using mixed effects logistic regression models, we estimated intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) at the reviewer and manuscript level. Finally, we examined the probability of rejection in relation to reviewer agreement and disagreement. The 2264 manuscripts sent for external review during the study period received 5881 reviews provided by 2916 reviewers; 28% of reviews recommended rejection. Chance corrected agreement (kappa statistic) on rejection among reviewers was 0.11 (p

IntroductionThe global medical technology industry brings thousands of devices to market every year. However, significant gaps persist in the scientific literature, in the medical device approval process, and in the realm of postmarketing surveillance. Although thousands of drugs obtain approval only after review in randomized controlled trials, relatively few new medical devices are subject to comparable scrutiny.ObjectiveTo improve health outcomes, we must enhance our scrutiny of medical devices, and, without simply deferring to the Food and Drug Administration, we must ask ourselves: Who is responsible for evaluating the safety and effectiveness of medical devices?ConclusionsTechnology assessments by independent organizations are a part of the solution to this challenge and may motivate further research focused on patient outcomes.