暂无摘要。

The woefully low proportion of scientists and clinicians underrepresented in medicine (UIM), including members of African-American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander communities, is well characterized and documented. Diversity in medicine is not only just, but it improves quality and outcomes. Yet, diversity in academic medicine remains stagnant, despite national recognition and urgent calls to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion across health sciences. One strategy that has shown to improve diversity in many sectors is high quality mentoring. While many institutions have adopted mentoring programs, there remains a lack of mentorship that is equitable, individualized, and sets a clear timeline for academic milestones that will position UIM mentees at the optimal trajectory for promotion and retention. A barrier to assembling these programs is the small number of UIM among the senior faculty ranks who are able to serve in this role, given the disproportionate burden to serve on a multitude of academic committees, task forces, and workgroups to fulfill institutional mandates to diversify representation. These time-consuming services, documented in the literature as the \"minority tax,\" are generally uncompensated and unaccounted for in terms of consideration for promotion, leadership positions, and other measures of career advancement. The Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Academic Mentors (JAM) Council represents a novel, culturally responsive, and anti-racist approach to achieve a more equitable and inclusive institutional environment. This approach strategically leverages the intergenerational wisdom and experience of senior UIM faculty via time-protected effort with the overall goals of improving rates of promotion, retention, and career satisfaction of early career UIM colleagues. This community case study describes the rationale, resources needed, processes, and proposed workflow required to launch the JAM Council, as well as the major roles and responsibilities for JAM mentors and mentees, which may be considered by academic medical centers focused on improving diversity among the faculty ranks.

Imposter syndrome (IS) is a feeling of being an intellectual fraud and is common among health professionals, particularly those underrepresented in medicine. IS is accompanied by burnout, self-doubt, and beliefs of decreased success. This workshop aims to discuss the impact of IS and develop strategies to confront IS at the individual, peer, and institutional levels.
During the 75-minute interactive workshop, participants listened to didactics and engaged in individual reflection, small-group case discussion, and large-group instruction. Workshop participants and facilitators included medical students, residents, fellows, faculty, staff, and program leadership. Anonymous postworkshop evaluations exploring participants\' satisfaction and intentions to change their behavior were collected. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the quantitative data, and content analysis was used to analyze participants\' intentions to change their behavior.
The workshop was presented at three local academic conferences and accepted at one national conference. Data were collected from 92 participants. Ninety-two percent of participants felt the workshop met its objectives, and 90% felt the workshop was a valuable use of their time. Furthermore, 90% of participants stated they would apply information learned at the workshop in the future. The participants indicated an intent to change behavior on individual, peer, and institutional levels, while recognizing that barriers exist at all those levels.
This workshop proved to be an effective means to discuss strategies on how to address IS at the individual, peer, and institutional levels. The materials can be adapted for relevance to various audiences.

Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) academic physicians are poorly represented among medical school faculty when compared with their proportion in the US population, receive NIH research awards less frequently, are promoted less often, indicate lower career satisfaction, and report higher social isolation, than faculty who are not under-represented. Supporting a successful and sustainable workforce of UIM academic physicians is essential in neurology, because such neurologists are more likely to engage in research to reduce disparities in neurological outcomes that affect underserved and/or low-income communities, and help improve the paucity of diverse race-ethnic participation in clinical trials. Having more diverse academic neurologists serve in such roles could bolster their careers and model possibilities for others who share similar cultures and backgrounds. Beyond leading/joining diversity affairs committees, more UIM are needed in mainstream leadership roles. In this work, we explore self-application vs. appointment/nomination opportunities and how this play a role in leadership opportunities. In addition to considering appropriate weighing of self-applications vs. appointments based opportunities, we highlight approaches and introduce the concept of nudging. Nudging, which refers to purposely increasing the visibility and appeal of particular items with the goal of boosting the odds of selecting those items, has been shown to successfully influence the process of selection, and may help level the leadership playing field for UIM in neurology.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeon (ACS), American Surgical Association (ASA), Association of Women Surgeons (AWS), and Society of Black Academic Surgeons (SBAS) partnered to gain insight into whether inequities found in surgical society presidents may be present earlier.
METHODS: ACS, ASA, AWS, and SBAS presidents\' CVs were assessed for demographics and scholastic achievements at the time of first faculty appointment. Regression analyses controlling for age were performed to determine relative differences across societies.
RESULTS: 66 of the 68 presidents\' CVs were received and assessed (97% response rate). 50% of AWS future presidents were hired as Instructors rather than Assistant professors, compared to 29.4% of SBAS, 25% of ASA and 29.4% of ACS. The future ACS, ASA, and SBAS presidents had more total publications than the AWS presidents, but similar numbers of 1st and Sr. author publications.
CONCLUSIONS: Gender inequities in academic surgeon hiring practices and perceived scholastic success may be present at first hire.