Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: This study used a self-authorship framework to explore if diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and social determinants of health (SDoH)-focused labs and learning activities increase student confidence in understanding aspects of implicit bias (IB) and SDoH and how these activities impact student comfort discussing and confidence initiating conversations on DEI/SDoH topics with colleagues, faculty, supervisors, and patients.
METHODS: First year (P1) PharmD students engaged in three learning activities across two courses. Students were challenged to evaluate their biases and incorporate DEI/SDoH into their professional identity formation (PIF). This study utilized a mixed-method, embedded approach to analyze assessment data collected via a questionnaire and assignments administered at three points during the fall semester. Quantitative analysis used a quasi-experimental, between-subjects, pretest-posttest design. The qualitative component used open-ended questions to gain additional insight into participant experiences, gathered detail on perceptions, and provided context.
RESULTS: A one-way ANOVA showed statistically significant increases between assessment points for all items related to confidence understanding IB and SDoH. Comfort discussing DEI/SDoH topics with supervisors/faculty and patients increased over time. Comfort discussing DEI/SDoH topics with colleagues did not increase. Three salient themes emerged from qualitative analyses (bias and privilege awareness, education, and professionalism).
CONCLUSIONS: This study found students started evaluating their own knowledge, beliefs, and claims in social and professional settings as defined by the self-authorship framework. Student comfort and confidence discussing DEI/SDoH topics increased over time. Findings support engaging students in multimodal programming may support incorporation of DEI/SDoH into PIF.
METHODS: First year (P1) PharmD students engaged in three learning activities across two courses. Students were challenged to evaluate their biases and incorporate DEI/SDoH into their professional identity formation (PIF). This study utilized a mixed-method, embedded approach to analyze assessment data collected via a questionnaire and assignments administered at three points during the fall semester. Quantitative analysis used a quasi-experimental, between-subjects, pretest-posttest design. The qualitative component used open-ended questions to gain additional insight into participant experiences, gathered detail on perceptions, and provided context.
RESULTS: A one-way ANOVA showed statistically significant increases between assessment points for all items related to confidence understanding IB and SDoH. Comfort discussing DEI/SDoH topics with supervisors/faculty and patients increased over time. Comfort discussing DEI/SDoH topics with colleagues did not increase. Three salient themes emerged from qualitative analyses (bias and privilege awareness, education, and professionalism).
CONCLUSIONS: This study found students started evaluating their own knowledge, beliefs, and claims in social and professional settings as defined by the self-authorship framework. Student comfort and confidence discussing DEI/SDoH topics increased over time. Findings support engaging students in multimodal programming may support incorporation of DEI/SDoH into PIF.
摘要：
目的：本研究使用自创框架来探索多样性，股本，和包容性（DEI）和健康的社会决定因素（SDoH）为重点的实验室和学习活动增加了学生对理解内隐偏见（IB）和SDoH方面的信心，以及这些活动如何影响学生的舒适度讨论和信心启动对话DEI/SDoH主题与同事，教员,supervisors,和病人。
方法：第一年（P1）PharmD学生在两门课程中从事三项学习活动。学生被要求评估他们的偏见，并将DEI/SDoH纳入他们的专业身份形成（PIF）。本研究采用了混合方法，嵌入式方法，以分析通过问卷和在秋季学期的三个点进行的作业收集的评估数据。定量分析采用了准实验，主体之间，前测-后测设计。定性组件使用开放式问题来获得对参与者体验的更多见解，收集感知细节，并提供了上下文。
结果：单因素方差分析显示，对于与信心理解IB和SDoH相关的所有项目，评估点之间有统计学上的显着增加。随着时间的推移，与主管/教职员工和患者讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度增加。与同事讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度没有增加。定性分析产生了三个突出的主题(偏见和特权意识，教育,和专业性）。
结论：这项研究发现学生开始评估自己的知识，信仰,以及自我授权框架所定义的社会和专业环境中的主张。学生讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度和信心随着时间的推移而增加。研究结果支持让学生参与多模态编程可能支持将DEI/SDoH纳入PIF。
方法：第一年（P1）PharmD学生在两门课程中从事三项学习活动。学生被要求评估他们的偏见，并将DEI/SDoH纳入他们的专业身份形成（PIF）。本研究采用了混合方法，嵌入式方法，以分析通过问卷和在秋季学期的三个点进行的作业收集的评估数据。定量分析采用了准实验，主体之间，前测-后测设计。定性组件使用开放式问题来获得对参与者体验的更多见解，收集感知细节，并提供了上下文。
结果：单因素方差分析显示，对于与信心理解IB和SDoH相关的所有项目，评估点之间有统计学上的显着增加。随着时间的推移，与主管/教职员工和患者讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度增加。与同事讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度没有增加。定性分析产生了三个突出的主题(偏见和特权意识，教育,和专业性）。
结论：这项研究发现学生开始评估自己的知识，信仰,以及自我授权框架所定义的社会和专业环境中的主张。学生讨论DEI/SDoH主题的舒适度和信心随着时间的推移而增加。研究结果支持让学生参与多模态编程可能支持将DEI/SDoH纳入PIF。
