Journal of general internal medicine
-
The justice-involved population faces significant health disparities yet is often overlooked in medical education, resulting in medical providers having limited preparation to serve this community. The objective of this study is to understand the scope and context of medical education in correctional healthcare. ⋯ Registration number CRD42023427470.
-
Standardized examinations measure progress throughout medical education. Successful completion of the American Board of Internal Medicine Certification Examination (ABIM-CE) benchmarks completion of internal medicine (IM) residency training. Recent declines in initial ABIM-CE pass rates may prompt residency programs to examine strategies to improve learner performance. ⋯ Inferences from ITE-focused articles support use as a predictive tool; specifically, a score < 35th percentile signals a resident at risk for failing the ABIM-CE while > 70th percentile is predictive of passing. Lastly, inferences from curriculum- and program-focused articles suggest standard contents (conferences) do not correlate with CE passage, while targeted clinical reasoning and remediation plans do. IM residency programs should consider adopting learning augmentation strategies targeted to at-risk residents to support CE passage.
-
Editorial Review
Strategies to Optimize Cervical Cancer Screening Rates Among Transgender and Gender-Diverse People Assigned Female at Birth.
Self-sampling for primary HPV detection for cervical cancer screening is now FDA-approved. Many persons interested in cervical cancer screening are eager to opt out of the invasive speculum exam and opt into the self-sampling. There is no limitation on which persons can choose self-sampling. ⋯ However, no clinical guidelines describe the best practices to increase screening among this underserved population. Much community work needs to occur to make the language of screening gender-affirming for all participants. Solutions to currently invasive follow-up exams after abnormal screens need to be communicated in language directed by the TGD AFAB community.
-
Randomized clinical trials provide reassurances that confounding factors are balanced at baseline whereas blinding is essential to assure the balance of extraneous factors thereafter. This article provides a three-part taxonomy of pitfalls that can arise because of inadequate blinding in clinical trials. We introduce a cautionary framework for readers interpreting a blinded randomized trial for evidence-based medicine. ⋯ Further pitfalls arise due to surrounding oversight including unblinding of research ethics boards and scientific reviewers. These caveats are sources of misunderstanding when observing the apparent connection between a clinical intervention and patient outcomes. An awareness of specific pitfalls might help advance the interpretation and application of blinded randomized clinical trials to inform evidence-based medical care.
-
Decision aids (DAs), compared to no DAs, help improve the key aspects of shared decision-making, including increased knowledge, discussion frequency, and reduction in decisional conflict. However, systematic reviews have reported varied conclusions on screening uptake, and which DAs are superior to alternative forms in shared decision-making for cancer screening has not been comprehensively reviewed. ⋯ PROSPERO, CRD42021235957.