Chicago Health Magazine的动态

??“Medical expertise and an equity lens do not sit in opposition — they easily co-exist, and in fact strengthen each other.” ??????Education on neurodivergence is required within this panoramic lens. ????Autism, ADHD, dyslexia, Tourette’s, dyscalculia, etc are intersectional with other inequities. ??In a healthcare context, there is minimal focus (if any) on the additional distress of patients who are neurodivergent. Recognition, empathy, modified communication skills and environmental modifications are required. ??This will improve healthcare outcomes for neurodivergent patients.

Exciting news! An excerpt from my new book, Beyond Diagnosis, is live on KevinMD. I'm confident you'll find it engaging and inspiring. Wishing you a fantastic week ahead! #KevinMD #Doximity #bookexcerpt #bookrecommendations #medicine

Fascinating article - well worth a read

??????Are we losing the art of medicine and best patient care to the potentially competitive “back-stabbing”culture of academic medicine and an over emphasis on publications and grants? ??Along with a computer-oriented management system, are we losing the fundamentals of medical care and causing increasing dissociation and burnout? We cannot easily separate the competitive dog-eat-dog culture from empathic caring. ??Along with increased bureaucracy, increased pressure to publish or perish, results in physician satisfaction are becoming poorer, and that will result in the deterioration of patient satisfaction. There is only so much a physician can do without succumbing to mental and physical health deterioration. #medicine #culture

Missed your chance to join the 2024 Joy in Medicine? program? Don't worry! Dr. Christine Sinsky shares top insights from this year's recognized programs, trends in #physicianwellbeing, and how you can prepare for the 2025 application.?Tune in to this episode of #AMAUpdate now!

From the "You Don't Have To Be Smart To Be Stupid But It Helps" Dept: I found this article to be somewhat puzzling, in part, because there is so little actual research to base claims on instead of anecdotes, but I think there are also problems in conceptualizations and interpretation. Consider the following quote: ***During the pandemic, the public was told repeatedly that modern medicine is science-based. But when I started talking to surgeons and other physicians for this article, I uncovered something decidedly unscientific.*** I have no problem with the statement "modern medicine is science-based" -- one can usually find published research with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that support certain medical procedures, interpretations, and conceptions. However, though physicians may get science-based training (keeping in mind that all research is tentative until it consistently passes falsification tests), they are not scientists, indeed, I would be very leery of any "research" a physician may conduct unless I knew that they had a solid background in experimental methods (as appropriate to their specific area) and statistical analysis (my own experience with certain physicians who were noted for their statistical knowledge left me wondering how they managed to get such a reputation). I am reminded of Barry Marshall and Robin Warren's research on H. Pylori -- was the reaction they faced from other physicians due to "scientific skepticism" or a reliance on superstition/reliance on rituals/accepted "wisdom"? See the Wikipedia entry on Barry Marshall's work on H. Pylori (see: https://lnkd.in/e7WA4xS8 ). And if you are up for it, review the development of the Germ Theory of Disease on Wikipedia (see: https://lnkd.in/e7g65aj4 ).

I was invited by The Journal of Radiology Nursing to review and write a column on Dr. Peter Hotez MD PhD’s book, The Deadly Rise of Anti-Science. Dr. Hotez was a regular expert on MSNBC and CNBC during the pandemic. My review is a column in the October issue of the JRN journal. A snippet is below. “The book also calls for us to lean forward and assume our new roles with new armor to fight in public squares and to support others that are. Given the broader risk, there is space for everyone to play a role. There is no neutrality when one develops empirical maturity. The heavyweights in anti-science require counterweights of truth and empirical evidence. Our silence is complicity and it benefits no one but those that are on the side of foolishness, negative disruption and chaos. Civil liberties do not replace the common sense of empirical evidence. There is room for debate but ones that are sense-filled versus senseless arguments. The damage is also insidious with not only a growing number of dissenters but also a growing number of intelligent and well-intended folks and believers in sciences turning into doubters. This is a clarion call for activists versus ideologists in science and beyond to preserve what is right, just and empirically based and grounded in equity.” The Anti-Science movement impacts nurses and healthcare delivery overall. It truly impacts all of us. #nursesonlinkedin #antiscienceisantinursing

Bringing this into medical education has the potential to be a game changer in the impact that physicians can have for their patients. Integrating how to incorporate this into clincal care and connect to community based resources quickly opens the door to understanding nutrition and the challenges our patients face in food access. There is a network for food access that we can tap into.

Innovative Collaboration Expands Functional Medicine Education to Medical Residents Follow me for more #lifestylemedicine advice and programs to make a real change in your life! ?? https://lnkd.in/e-vsY9D4 #bodyheartandsoul #bodyheartsoul #drnanecheung #nutrigenomic

The AAMC annual Report on Residents shows an increasingly diverse cohort of medical residents, trends within specialties, and preferred locations for physicians to practice after residency, among other findings. The report, which the Association of American Medical Colleges compiles annually, is intended to help residency applicants, program directors, residency specialty organizations, and researchers understand changes in trends. Among the findings: Changing demographics In the 2022-2023 academic year, there were nearly 155,000 residents, continuing the average increase of 5,000 residents each year since 2019. The percentage of women represented across all specialties slightly increased, from 47% in the 2021-2022 academic year to 48% in 2022-2023. Among residents and fellows with MD degrees, the percentage of those identifying as Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin increased slightly from 8.1% to 8.3%; and the percentage of those identifying as Black or African American also increased slightly, from 6.1% to 6.3%. Specialty trends The number of residents in the Internal Medicine subspecialty of Geriatric Medicine has decreased over the last four years, from 229 in 2019-2020 to 204 in 2022-2023. Two of the largest specialties, Emergency Medicine and Obstetrics and Gynecology, saw an increase in their numbers. Life post-residency A strong majority of the residents (57.1%) who completed their residency training between 2013 and 2022 went on to practice in the same state or territory as their residency. The states/territories that retained the highest percentage of residents were California (77.5%), Puerto Rico (74.8%), and Alaska (70.8%). The states/territories with the lowest retention rates were the District of Columbia (38.5%), Delaware (39.2%), and New Hampshire (40.8%). Check out the entire article for more fascinating statistics on this issue that impacts everyone.