Upholding Our PROMISE: Underrepresented in Medicine Pediatric Residents' Perspectives on Interventions to Promote Belonging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents experience challenges during training that threaten their sense of belonging in medicine; therefore, residency programs should intentionally implement interventions to promote belonging. This study explored UIM pediatric residents' perspectives on current residency program measures designed to achieve this goal. METHOD: The authors conducted a secondary qualitative analysis as part of a national cross-sectional study, PROmoting Med-ed Insight into Supportive Environments (PROMISE), which explored pediatric residents' experiences and perspectives during training in relation to their self-identities. A 23-item web-based survey was distributed through the Association of Pediatric Program Directors Longitudinal Educational Research Assessment Network from October 2020 to January 2021. Participants provided free-text responses to the question "What are current measures that promote a sense of belonging for the UIM community in your training program?" The authors used conventional content analysis to code and identify themes in responses from UIM participants. RESULTS: Of the 1,748 residents invited to participate, 931 (53%) residents from 29 programs completed the survey, with 167 (18%) identifying as UIM. Of the 167 UIM residents, 74 (44%) residents from 22 programs responded to the free-text question. The authors coded more than 140 unique free-text responses and identified 7 major themes: (1) critical mass of UIM residents; (2) focused recruitment of UIM residents; (3) social support, including opportunities to build community among UIM residents; (4) mentorship; (5) caring and responsive leadership; (6) education on health disparities, diversity, equity, inclusion, and antiracism; and (7) opportunities to serve, including giving back to the local community and near-peer mentorship of UIM premedical and medical students. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first national study to describe UIM pediatric residents' perspectives on interventions that promote a sense of belonging. Programs should consider implementing these interventions to foster inclusion and belonging among UIM trainees.
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 | 0.021 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".