Equitable Recruitment Practices


Equitable Recruitment Practices Banner

Add to Calendar Equitable Recruitment Practices 9/1/2022 12:00:00 AM 9/1/2025 11:59:00 PM America/Los_Angeles For More Details: https://stanford.cloud-cme.com/UnconsciousBiasinRecruitment Description: Internet Enduring Material sponsored by Stanford University School of Medicine. Presented by Office of Faculty Development and Diversity at Stanford University School of Medicine.This CME activity provides education on equitable recruitment practices for faculty and graduate medical education (GME) trainees in the academic medicine workplace. Participants will be provided with an overview of equitable ... false MM/DD/YYYY


Date & Location
Thursday, September 1, 2022, 12:00 AM - Monday, September 1, 2025, 11:59 PM

Overview

Internet Enduring Material sponsored by Stanford University School of Medicine. Presented by Office of Faculty Development and Diversity at Stanford University School of Medicine. This CME activity provides education on equitable recruitment practices for faculty and graduate medical education (GME) trainees in the academic medicine workplace. Participants will be provided with an overview of equitable recruitment principles to apply throughout the search process, and can select to focus specifically on faculty search, GME recruitment, or both. Case studies with examples of application in specific academic medicine contexts will enable learners to understand how to apply the content into their own unique environments.


Registration

  Release Date: September 01, 2022
  Expiration Date: September 01, 2025
  Estimated Time to Complete:  25 minutes
  Registration Fee: Free

Click the Begin to launch the course.  Recommended to take Unconscious Bias in Medicine course prior to this course.


Credits
AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™ (0.50 hours), Non-Physician Participation Credit (0.50 hours), ABIM MOC Part 2 (0.50 hours), ABA MOCA Part 2 (0.50 hours), ABPath MOC Part II (0.50 hours), ABOHNS MOC Part II (0.50 hours), ABS CC (0.50 hours)

Target Audience
Specialties - Non-clinical
Professions - Non-Physician, Physician


Objectives
At the conclusion of this activity, participants should be able to:

  1. Define ways in which everyday biases, both interpersonal and systemic, may impact recruitment and hiring
  2. Identify examples of common challenges to equitable recruitment practices
  3. Identify interpersonal and organizational solutions and strategies to build an equitable recruitment process

Accreditation

In support of improving patient care, Stanford Medicine is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.  

Credit Designation 
American Medical Association (AMA) 
Stanford Medicine designates this Enduring Material for a maximum of 0.50 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditsTM.  Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. 

American Board of Anesthesia MOC Credit 
This activity contributes to the CME component of the American Board of Anesthesiology’s redesigned Maintenance of Certification in AnesthesiologyTM (MOCA®) program, known as MOCA 2.0®. Please consult the ABA website, www.theABA.org, for a list of all MOCA 2.0 requirements. 

American Board of Internal Medicine MOC Credit 
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 0.50 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine’s (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. It is the CME activity provider’s responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit.

American Board of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery MOC Credit
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn their required annual part II self-assessment credit in the American Board of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery’s Continuing Certification program (formerly known as MOC). It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of recognizing participation. 

American Board of Pathology MOC Credit
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 0.50 Lifelong Learning MOC points in the American Board of Pathology’s (ABPath) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. It is the CME activity provider’s responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABPath MOC credit.

American Board of Pediatrics MOC Credit 
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the learner to earn up to 0.50 MOC points in the American Board of Pediatrics’ (ABP) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. It is the CME activity provider’s responsibility to submit learner completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABP MOC credit.

American Board of Surgery MOC/CC Credit 
Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the learner to earn credit toward the CME [and Self-Assessment requirements] of the American Board of Surgery’s Continuous Certification program. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit learner completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABS credit. 

MOC Participation Threshold
Learner completes the online workshop, credits will be awarded upon completion.


Additional Information

Accessibility Statement
 Stanford University School of Medicine is committed to ensuring that its programs, services, goods and facilities are accessible to individuals with disabilities as specified under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008.  If you have needs that require special accommodations, please contact CME.

Cultural and Linguistic Competency
The planners and speakers of this CME activity have been encouraged to address cultural issues relevant to their topic area for the purpose of complying with California Assembly Bill 1195. Moreover, the Stanford University School of Medicine Multicultural Health Portal contains many useful cultural and linguistic competency tools including culture guides, language access information and pertinent state and federal laws.  You are encouraged to visit the Multicultural Health Portal: https://laneguides.stanford.edu/multicultural-health

References/Bibliography

  1. Arkin, Nicole, Cara Lai, Larissa Miyachi Kiwakyou, Gregory Milo Lochbaum, Audrey Shafer, Steven K. Howard, Edward R. Mariano, and Magali Fassiotto. “What’s in a Word? Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Leadership Language in Anesthesiology Resident Feedback.” Journal of Graduate Medical Education 11, no. 1 (February 1, 2019): 44–52. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-18-00377.1.
  2. Boatright, Dowin, David Ross, Patrick O’Connor, Edward Moore, and Marcella Nunez-Smith. “Racial Disparities in Medical Student Membership in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Society.” JAMA Internal Medicine 177, no. 5 (May 1, 2017): 659. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9623.
  3. Capers, Quinn. “How Clinicians and Educators Can Mitigate Implicit Bias in Patient Care and Candidate Selection in Medical Education.” ATS Scholar 1, no. 3 (September 2020): 211–17. https://doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2020-0024PS.
  4. Correll, Shelley J., Stephen Benard, and In Paik. “Getting a Job: Is There a Motherhood Penalty?” American Journal of Sociology 112, no. 5 (March 2007): 1297–1339. https://doi.org/10.1086/511799.
  5. Ellis, Josh, Onyeka Otugo, Alden Landry, and Adaira Landry. “Interviewed While Black.” New England Journal of Medicine 383, no. 25 (December 17, 2020): 2401–4. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2023999.
  6. Goldin, Claudia, and Cecilia Rouse. “Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of ‘Blind’ Auditions on Female Musicians.” American Economic Review 90, no. 4 (September 1, 2000): 715–41. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.715.
  7. Gorman, Elizabeth H. “Gender Stereotypes, Same-Gender Preferences, and Organizational Variation in the Hiring of Women: Evidence from Law Firms.” American Sociological Review 70, no. 4 (August 2005): 702–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240507000408.
    “Holistic Principles in Resident Selection: An Introduction.” Association of American Medical Colleges, 2019.
  8. Low, Daniel, Samantha W. Pollack, Zachary C. Liao, Ramoncita Maestas, Larry E. Kirven, Anne M. Eacker, and Leo S. Morales. “Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Clinical Grading in Medical School.” Teaching and Learning in Medicine 31, no. 5 (October 20, 2019): 487–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2019.1597724.
  9. Lucey, Catherine R., Karen E. Hauer, Dowin Boatright, and Alicia Fernandez. “Medical Education’s Wicked Problem: Achieving Equity in Assessment for Medical Learners.” Academic Medicine 95, no. 12S (December 2020): S98–108. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003717.
  10. Maxfield, Charles M., Matthew P. Thorpe, Terry S. Desser, Darel E. Heitkamp, Nathan C. Hull, Karen S. Johnson, Nicholas A. Koontz, Gary W. Mlady, Timothy J. Welch, and Lars J. Grimm. “Bias in Radiology Resident Selection: Do We Discriminate Against the Obese and Unattractive?” Academic Medicine 94, no. 11 (November 2019): 1774–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002813.
  11. Moss-Racusin, C. A., J. F. Dovidio, V. L. Brescoll, M. J. Graham, and J. Handelsman. “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no. 41 (October 9, 2012): 16474–79. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
  12. Pololi, Linda, Lisa A. Cooper, and Phyllis Carr. “Race, Disadvantage and Faculty Experiences in Academic Medicine.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 25, no. 12 (December 2010): 1363–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1478-7.
  13. Ross, David A., Dowin Boatright, Marcella Nunez-Smith, Ayana Jordan, Adam Chekroud, and Edward Z. Moore. “Differences in Words Used to Describe Racial and Gender Groups in Medical Student Performance Evaluations.” Edited by Jeffrey A. Gold. PLOS ONE 12, no. 8 (August 9, 2017): e0181659. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181659.
  14. Schmidt, Frank L., and John E. Hunter. “The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings.” Psychological Bulletin 124, no. 2 (1998): 262–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262.
  15. Sheridan, Jennifer T., Eve Fine, Christine Maidl Pribbenow, Jo Handelsman, and Molly Carnes. “Searching for Excellence & Diversity: Increasing the Hiring of Women Faculty at One Academic Medical Center:” Academic Medicine 85, no. 6 (June 2010): 999–1007. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181dbf75a.
  16. Teherani, Arianne, Karen E. Hauer, Alicia Fernandez, Talmadge E. King, and Catherine Lucey. “How Small Differences in Assessed Clinical Performance Amplify to Large Differences in Grades and Awards: A Cascade With Serious Consequences for Students Underrepresented in Medicine.” Academic Medicine 93, no. 9 (September 2018): 1286–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002323.
  17. Tilcsik, András. “Pride and Prejudice: Employment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 117, no. 2 (September 2011): 586–626. https://doi.org/10.1086/661653.
  18. Trix, Frances, and Carolyn Psenka. “Exploring the Color of Glass: Letters of Recommendation for Female and Male Medical Faculty.” Discourse & Society 14, no. 2 (March 2003): 191–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926503014002277.
  19. Tsugawa, Yusuke, Anupam B. Jena, Jose F. Figueroa, E. John Orav, Daniel M. Blumenthal, and Ashish K. Jha. “Comparison of Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates for Medicare Patients Treated by Male vs Female Physicians.” JAMA Internal Medicine 177, no. 2 (February 1, 2017): 206. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7875.
  20. Uhlmann, Ericluis, and Geoffrey L. Cohen. “Constructed Criteria: Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination.” Psychological Science 16, no. 6 (June 2005): 474–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01559.x.



    For CME general questions, please contact 
             Email: [email protected]