A scoping review of social determinants of health curricula in post-graduate medical education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social determinants of health are responsible for 50% of ill health. The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada CanMEDS role of "physician advocate" requires physicians to attain competency in this particular domain, but physician trainees feel this is not well covered in their training programs. This study performed a scoping review of social determinants of health curricula that had been described, implemented and evaluated in post-graduate medical education. A search using MEDLINE(OvidSP) database, with search terms "residency," "curriculum," and "social determinants" with no age, language, and publication date restrictions was done. Researchers identified a total of 12 studies, all from the United States, in internal medicine (n=4), pediatrics (n=4), family medicine (n=2), or multiple (n=2) residency programs. Most curricula (n=8, 67%), were longitudinal, and most contained both patient or community exposure (n=11, 92%) and/or classroom-based components (n=10, 83%). Most (78%) curricula improved participant related outcomes, including exam performance, awareness regarding personal practice, confidence, improved screening for social determinants of health and referral to support services. Program specific outcomes were frequently positive (50%) and included resident satisfaction and high course evaluation scores, high representation of resident and faculty from minority groups, applicability of training to underserviced populations, and improved engagement of marginalized community members. When evaluated, academic outcomes were always positive, and included acceptance of scholarly projects to national conferences, publication of research work, grants earned to support health projects, local or national awards for leadership and community engagement, and curriculum graduates later pursuing related Masters degrees and/or establishing medical practices in underserved areas. Only one study reported a patient-related outcome, with advice provided by health care providers considered by patients to be helpful. Researchers used these results to design recommendations for creation of a post-graduate curriculum to address social determinants of health were provided.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".