Cited by 262Innovations in Medical EducationCultural Competency in Health CareHealth and Medical Education

Structural Competency: Curriculum for Medical Students, Residents, and Interprofessional Teams on the Structural Factors That Produce Health Disparities

Open access
Neff, Joshua, Holmes, Seth M., Knight, Kelly R., Strong, Shirley, Thompson-Lastad, Ariana, McGuinness, Cara, Duncan, Laura, Saxena, Nimish +12 more·2020·MedEdPORTAL

Abstract

Introduction: Research on disparities in health and health care has demonstrated that social, economic, and political factors are key drivers of poor health outcomes. Yet the role of such structural forces on health and health care has been incorporated unevenly into medical training. The framework of structural competency offers a paradigm for training health professionals to recognize and respond to the impact of upstream, structural factors on patient health and health care. Methods: We report on a brief, interprofessional structural competency curriculum implemented in 32 distinct instances between 2015 and 2017 throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. In consultation with medical and interprofessional education experts, we developed open-ended, written-response surveys to qualitatively evaluate this curriculum's impact on participants. Qualitative data from 15 iterations were analyzed via directed thematic analysis, coding language, and concepts to identify key themes. Results: Three core themes emerged from analysis of participants' comments. First, participants valued the curriculum's focus on the application of the structural competency framework in real-world clinical, community, and policy contexts. Second, participants with clinical experience (residents, fellows, and faculty) reported that the curriculum helped them reframe how they thought about patients. Third, participants reported feeling reconnected to their original motivations for entering the health professions. Discussion: This structural competency curriculum fills a gap in health professional education by equipping learners to understand and respond to the role that social, economic, and political structural factors play in patient and community health.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10888

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Meaningful engagement in advocacy can mitigate burnout.

    “Data suggests that meaningful engagement in advocacy can reinforce physician identity and the choice to practice medicine8–11,26, provide an outlet for stress management27, mitigate burnout7–9,26,28, and support professional development29.”

    From Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022 (2023) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says collective action to address structural problems can help address burnout, which supports the possibility that advocacy may mitigate it. But the paper presents this as an argument, not a measured effect of meaningful advocacy engagement, and says further research is needed. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Meaningful engagement in advocacy can reinforce physician identity and the choice to practice medicine.

    “Data suggests that meaningful engagement in advocacy can reinforce physician identity and the choice to practice medicine8–11,26, provide an outlet for stress management27, mitigate burnout7–9,26,28, and support professional development29.”

    From Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022 (2023) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Results report that some medical students and physicians felt reconnected to their reasons for entering medicine after structural-competency training; one fellow also said the training inspired policy advocacy. The paper does not show that meaningful engagement in advocacy itself reinforced physician identity or the choice to practice medicine. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several curricula recommended that educators explicitly discuss how developed skills can be applied in a medical career and emphasize that advocacy is achievable and important to physician identity irrespective of career path.

    “Several curricula recommended that educators explicitly discuss how developed skills can be applied in a medical career9,12,14 and emphasize that advocacy is achievable and important to physician identity irrespective of career path13.”

    From Advocacy Curricula in Graduate Medical Education: an Updated Systematic Review from 2017 to 2022 (2023) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Methods > Implementation section describes teaching why structural competency matters for providers, using an example of provider advocacy and discussing ways to intervene in and beyond the clinic. This supports presenting advocacy as important and actionable, but our copy does not say educators should link it to physician identity irrespective of career path. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Lack of formal, explicit, and consistent training leads to inadequate preparation of trainees.

    “Lack of formal7, 8,11,19,21, explicit9,31, and consistent11,16,32 training leads to inadequate preparation13,28,33 of trainees and negatively impacts patient care13.”
  • Trainees value real-world application of advocacy frameworks as well as active learning opportunities.

    “trainees value real-world application of advocacy frameworks9,10,12,14 as well as active learning opportunities40.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [32]Bereknyei S, Foran SM, Johnson KD, Scott AJ, Miller TL, Braddock CH III Stopping discrimination before it starts: the impact of civil rights laws on healthcare disparities—a medical school curriculum. MedEdPORTAL. 2009; 5: 7740 https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.7740 · DOI
  2. [33]Barkley L, Alford D Medical ethics and health equity: the Henrietta Lacks story. MedEdPORTAL. 2015; 11: 10276 https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10276 · DOI
  3. [35]Sullivan W, Eckstrand K, Rush C, Peebles K, Lomis K, Fleming A An intervention for clinical medical students on LGBTI health. MedEdPORTAL. 2013; 9: 9349 https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9349 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Neff, J., Holmes, S. M., Knight, K. R., Strong, S., Thompson-Lastad, A., McGuinness, C., Duncan, L., Saxena, N., Harvey, M. J., Langford, A., Carey-Simms, K. L., Minahan, S. N., Satterwhite, S., Ruppel, C., Lee, S., Walkover, L., De Avila, J., Lewis, B., Matthews, J., & Nelson, N.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Samuel Merritt University (US)
  • Postdoctoral Fellow, Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
  • Boston University (US)
  • San Jose State University (US)
  • Planned Parenthood (US)
  • Highland Hospital (US)
  • Senior Manager, Health Outreach Partners
  • Drexel University (US)
  • Medical Student, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Neff, Joshua
Venue
MedEdPORTAL
Published
2020-03-13
Volume
16
Pages
10888-10888
ISSN
2374-8265 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3009702730
Cited by
262
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 12 · 2012: 1
FWCI
29.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • MedEdPORTAL (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • San José State University ScholarWorks (San Jose State University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • TUScholarShare (Temple University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • University of California Berkeley
  • University of California, San Francisco
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007618)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (T32AT003997)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Cultural Competency in Health Care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
Keywords
structural competency, health disparities, structural determinants of health, interprofessional education, medical curriculum, residents and fellows, social determinants of health, health policy, curriculum evaluation, learner perceptions
MeSH terms
Curriculum, Health Occupations, Health Personnel, Humans, San Francisco, Students, Medical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review