Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Medical schools have increasingly integrated social justice, anti-racism, and health equity training into their curricula. Yet, no research examines whether medical students understand the complex history of racial injustice. We sought to investigate the relationship between medical students’ historical knowledge and their perceptions regarding health equity. Methods Medical students at one large urban medical school self-rated their familiarity and importance of various racially-significant historical events and persons, as well as their agreement with statements regarding health equity, education, and preparedness to act. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted in R. Results Of 166 (RR=31.3%) participants, 96% agreed that understanding historical context is necessary in medicine; yet 65% of students could not describe the historical significance of racial events or persons. Only 57% felt that they understood this context, and the same percentage felt other medical students did not. A minority of students felt empowered (40%) or prepared (31%) to take action when they witness racial injustice in healthcare. Multiracial identity was significantly associated with increased knowledge of African American history ( p <0.01), and a humanities background was significantly associated with increased knowledge of Latin American history ( p =0.017). There was a positive, significant relationship between advocacy statements, such as “I have taken action” ( p <0.001) and “I know the roots of racism” ( p <0.001) with mean familiarity of historical events. Conclusions This study demonstrates that while students agree that racism has no place in healthcare, there remains a paucity of knowledge regarding many events and figures in the history of American race relations and civil rights, with implications for future physicians’ patient care and health equity efforts.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a large disruption in the clinical education of medical students, particularly in-person clinical activities. To address the resulting challenges faced by students interested in emergency medicine (EM), we proposed and held a peer-led, online learning course for rising fourth-year medical students. A total of 61 medical students participated in an eight-lecture EM course. Students were evaluated through pre- and post-course assessments designed to ascertain perceived comfort with learning objectives and overall course feedback. Pre- and post-lecture assignments were also used to increase student learning. Mean confidence improved in every learning objective after the course. Favored participation methods were three-person call-outs, polling, and using the \"chat\" function. Resident participation was valued for \"real-life\" examples and clinical pearls. This interactive model for online EM education can be an effective format for dissemination when in-person education may not be available.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a new human disease with few effective treatments 1 . Convalescent plasma, donated by persons who have recovered from COVID-19, is the acellular component of blood that contains antibodies, including those that specifically recognize SARS-CoV-2. These antibodies, when transfused into patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, are thought to exert an antiviral effect, suppressing virus replication before patients have mounted their own humoral immune responses 2 , 3 . Virus-specific antibodies from recovered persons are often the first available therapy for an emerging infectious disease, a stopgap treatment while new antivirals and vaccines are being developed 1 , 2 . This retrospective, propensity score–matched case–control study assessed the effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in 39 patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19 at The Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. Oxygen requirements on day 14 after transfusion worsened in 17.9% of plasma recipients versus 28.2% of propensity score–matched controls who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.75–0.98; chi-square test P value = 0.025). Survival also improved in plasma recipients (adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13–0.89; chi-square test P  = 0.027). Convalescent plasma is potentially effective against COVID-19, but adequately powered, randomized controlled trials are needed. Convalescent plasma for treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is associated with improved survival in a retrospective comparison with matched controls, supporting further study in randomized controlled trials.

Background Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) provide a framework for the fair allocation of scarce resources during emergencies. The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has disproportionately affected Black and Latinx populations in the USA. No literature exists comparing state-level CSC. It is unknown how equitably CSC would allocate resources. Methods The authors identified all publicly available state-level CSC through online searches and communication with state governments. Publicly available CSC were systematically reviewed for content including ethical framework and prioritization strategy. Results CSC were identified for 29 states. Ethical principles were explicitly stated in 23 (79.3%). Equity was listed as a guiding ethical principle in 15 (51.7%); 19 (65.5%) said decisions should not factor in race, ethnicity, disability, and other identity-based factors. Ten states (34.4%) allowed for consideration of societal value, which could lead to prioritization of health care workers and other essential personnel. Twenty-one (72.4%) CSC provided a specific strategy for prioritizing patients for critical care resources, e.g., ventilators. All incorporated Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores; 15 (71.4%) of these specific CSC considered comorbid conditions (e.g., cardiac disease, renal failure, malignancy) in resource allocation decisions. Conclusion There is wide variability in the existence and specificity of CSC across the USA. CSC may disproportionately impact disadvantaged populations due to inequities in comorbid condition prevalence, expected lifespan, and other effects of systemic racism.

Rather than being a neutral phenomenon, the authors propose that medical school donations should be viewed as a social good for advancing education and improving healthcare. Seen in this light, they aim to offer a framework for analysis that will be useful to medical institutions and their stakeholders in addressing proposed donations from contentious or divisive sources, and in managing those donations that subsequently appear controversial.

Telehealth drastically reduces the time burden of appointments and increases access to care for homebound patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many outpatient practices closed, requiring an expansion of telemedicine capabilities. However, a significant number of patients remain unconnected to telehealth-capable patient portals. Currently, no literature exists on the success of and barriers to remote enrollment in telehealth patient portals. From March 26 to May 8, 2020, a total of 324 patients were discharged from Mount Sinai Beth Israel (MSBI), a teaching hospital in New York City. Study volunteers attempted to contact and enroll patients in the MyChart patient portal to allow the completion of a post-discharge video visit. If patients were unable to enroll, barriers were documented and coded for themes. Of the 324 patients discharged from MSBI during the study period, 277 (85%) were not yet enrolled in MyChart. Volunteers successfully contacted 136 patients (49% of those eligible), and 39 (14%) were successfully enrolled. Inability to contact patients was the most significant barrier. For those successfully contacted but not enrolled, the most frequent barrier was becoming lost to follow-up (29% of those contacted), followed by lack of interest in remote appointments (21%) and patient technological limitations (9%). Male patients, and those aged 40–59, were significantly less likely to successfully enroll compared to other patients. Telehealth is critical for healthcare delivery. Remote enrollment in a telemedicine-capable patient portal is feasible, yet underperforms compared to reported in-person enrollment rates. Health systems can improve telehealth infrastructure by incorporating patient portal enrollment into in-person workflows, educating on the importance of telehealth, and devising workarounds for technological barriers.