Samuels‐Kalow, Margaret

This study examines the patient- and hospital-level variation in time to initiation of inpatient management among patients admitted to general medical services.

ABSTRACT Background The Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) within the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine was established to advance the recruitment, promotion, retention, and career satisfaction of women in academic emergency medicine (AEM). Despite progress, persistent gender disparities remain in several areas, including compensation, promotion, and leadership representation. Objective To better assess and evaluate current AWAEM programming, we developed a logic model to visually and systematically map AWAEM activities and initiatives with current and future metrics for evaluation. Methods The logic model was guided by AWAEM’s strategic plan and developed through an iterative process involving feedback from AWAEM members and leaders. Results The model outlines key inputs, describes activities categorized across five thematic areas, and identifies tangible outputs with corresponding metrics for those activities. The model concludes with short‐, intermediate‐, and long‐term outcomes that speak to the likely impact of AWAEM’s programming. Discussion The proposed logic model serves as a practical framework to align AWAEM’s efforts to outcomes while also embedding evaluation into ongoing programming. It provides a visual tool for identifying gaps and incorporating data‐driven modifications, as well as facilitating collaboration across the academy. While there are limitations to this logic model, it provides an initial roadmap and foundation for strategic planning and evaluation. It also provides an opportunity to periodically revise the model as AWAEM’s needs evolve to ensure continued relevance and alignment with the needs of the entire membership. Additionally, this model can serve as a framework for other professional development groups, academies, and societies external to SAEM.

Abstract The emergency department ( ED ) occupies a unique position within the healthcare system, serving as a safety net for vulnerable patients, regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, country of origin, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or medical diagnosis. Shared decision making ( SDM ) presents special challenges when used with vulnerable population groups. The differing circumstances, needs, and perspectives of vulnerable groups invoke issues of provider bias, disrespect, judgmental attitudes, and lack of cultural competence, as well as patient mistrust and the consequences of their social and economic disenfranchisement. A research agenda that includes community‐engaged approaches, mixed‐methods studies, and cost‐effectiveness analyses is proposed to address the following questions: 1) What are the best processes/formats for SDM among racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, linguistic, social, or otherwise vulnerable groups who experience disadvantage in the healthcare system? 2) What organizational or systemic changes are needed to support SDM in the ED whenever appropriate? 3) What competencies are needed to enable emergency providers to consider patients’ situation/context in an unbiased way? 4) How do we teach these competencies to students and residents? 5) How do we cultivate these competencies in practicing emergency physicians, nurses, and other clinical providers who lack them? The authors also identify the importance of using accurate, group‐specific data to inform risk estimates for SDM decision aids for vulnerable populations and the need for increased ED ‐based care coordination and transitional care management capabilities to create additional care options that align with the needs and preferences of vulnerable populations.