Explore the vast range of titles available.

Anti-racism curricula are increasingly being recognized as an integral component of medical education. To our knowledge, there has not yet been a publication exploring resident perspectives from multiple institutions and explicitly representing both underrepresented in medicine (UIM) and non-UIM perspectives. To explore and compare UIM and non-UIM pediatric residents' perspectives on the content and qualities of meaningful anti-racism curricula. We performed an IRB-approved multi-institutional, qualitative study that incorporated Sotto-Santiago et al's conceptual framework for anti-racism education. Between February and May 2021, we conducted focus groups of UIM and non-UIM pediatric residents at three large residency programs in the United States. We developed focus group guides using literature review, expert consensus, feedback from study team racial equity experts, and piloting. Focus groups were conducted virtually, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. We employed thematic analysis to code transcripts, create categories, and develop themes until we reached thematic sufficiency. We completed member checking to ensure trustworthiness of themes. Forty residents participated (19 UIM and 21 non-UIM) in a total of six focus groups. We identified 7 themes, summarized as: 1) racism in medicine is pervasive, therefore (2) anti-racism education is critical to the development of competent physicians, and 3) education should extend to all healthcare providers. 4) Residents desired education focused on action-oriented strategies to advance anti-racism, 5) taught by those with both learned and lived experiences with racism, 6) in a psychologically safe space for UIM residents, and 7) with adequate time and financial resources for successful implementation and engagement. Our multi-institutional study affirms the need for pediatric resident anti-racism education, promotes co-creation as a method to affect culture change, and provides practical strategies for curricular design and implementation.

In a randomized clinical trial of early versus standard antiretroviral therapy (ART) in HIV-infected adults with a CD4 cell count between 200 and 350 cells/mm³ in Haiti, early ART decreased mortality by 75%. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of early versus standard ART in this trial. Trial data included use of ART and other medications, laboratory tests, outpatient visits, radiographic studies, procedures, and hospital services. Medication, laboratory, radiograph, labor, and overhead costs were from the study clinic, and hospital and procedure costs were from local providers. We evaluated cost per year of life saved (YLS), including patient and caregiver costs, with a median of 21 months and maximum of 36 months of follow-up, and with costs and life expectancy discounted at 3% per annum. Between 2005 and 2008, 816 participants were enrolled and followed for a median of 21 months. Mean total costs per patient during the trial were US$1,381 for early ART and US$1,033 for standard ART. After excluding research-related laboratory tests without clinical benefit, costs were US$1,158 (early ART) and US$979 (standard ART). Early ART patients had higher mean costs for ART (US$398 versus US$81) but lower costs for non-ART medications, CD4 cell counts, clinically indicated tests, and radiographs (US$275 versus US$384). The cost-effectiveness ratio after a maximum of 3 years for early versus standard ART was US$3,975/YLS (95% CI US$2,129/YLS-US$9,979/YLS) including research-related tests, and US$2,050/YLS excluding research-related tests (95% CI US$722/YLS-US$5,537/YLS). Initiating ART in HIV-infected adults with a CD4 cell count between 200 and 350 cells/mm³ in Haiti, consistent with World Health Organization advice, was cost-effective (US$/YLS <3 times gross domestic product per capita) after a maximum of 3 years, after excluding research-related laboratory tests. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00120510.