ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2019
Leading and Sustaining Curricular Change: Workshop Proceedings from the 2018 Sex and Gender Health Education Summit.
Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of a Lack of Reporting of Sex and Gender in Clinical Research on the Continuum of Medical Education.The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume · 2024Article
- Sex and Gender Health Educational Tenets: A Report from the 2020 Sex and Gender Health Education Summit.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2022Article
- Teaching Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Pediatric Clinical Settings: A Training Workshop for Faculty and Residents.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2021Article
- Collateral Damage: How COVID-19 Is Adversely Impacting Women Physicians.Journal of hospital medicine · 2020Article
- Sex and Gender Health Education Summit: Advancing Curricula Through a Multidisciplinary Lens.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The education of health science professionals must balance the incorporation of new and essential content against the current curriculum density. Scientific evidence documenting the impact of sex and gender on health outcomes establishes the need for incorporation of these topics into the health science curriculum. An interprofessional workshop was designed to provide participants with the knowledge and skills to effectively champion curricular change. Surveys before and after the workshop assessed the participants' perception of curriculum change. Introductory presentations addressed topics of organizational readiness and characteristics of change agents. This was followed by role-play activities in groups of 8 to 10, utilizing two scenarios. The first scenario involved a faculty champion advocating for change to the school curriculum leadership, and the second scenario involved the curriculum leadership advocating for change to the teaching faculty. After the role-play, participants shared the important points discovered by their groups, and the same information was collected by survey. After the workshop, 95% participants reported an increased ability to advocate for the inclusion of sex and gender topics in the curriculum. The most important aspect of the workshop was the providing of resources related to the teaching of sex and gender topics. We conclude that a workshop format balancing didactic information and role-playing scenarios is an effective tool for empowering faculty to introduce changes in health sciences curricula in areas that may be new to faculty or health science school leadership, such as the impact and role of sex and gender on health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.