ArticleHealth equity2025
Moving Beyond Mandatory Modules: Authentic Discussions About Racism and Health Equity at a Large Academic Medical Center.
Article in Health equity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Our institution launched a large-scale virtual training program called "Stepping Stones" that uses allegories to provide an increased understanding of concepts, such as interpersonal, internalized, and structural racism. The goal of this project was to implement facilitated discussions with trained leaders and determine the impact of these sessions in improving the experience of the modules and boosting comfort in discussing race and racism. Methods: We developed facilitated discussions as a complimentary intervention for colleagues who participated in the virtual system-wide intervention. Our intention was to create a safe space to foster reflection and collaborative learning on how racism shows up in our work environment. We conducted 22 sessions across Massachusetts General Hospital between December 2021 and February 2023. Each session included between 5 and 30 participants who were asked to complete a survey regarding their experience. Results: We collected post-session surveys from 102 out of 350 participants. Participants found the sessions to be informative and valuable. Over 97% of respondents rated the quality of the discussions as "Excellent" or "Very Good." Similarly, 95% of participants felt "Very" or "Somewhat" comfortable with discussing issues of race and racism in the workplace after the session. Discussion: Participants reported that the facilitated discussions were valuable, enhanced their ability to talk about racism in clinical environments, and provided an opportunity for reflection. Giving the hospital staff a common language and the ability to discuss such challenging topics may contribute to a culture of equity within our hospital.
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.