Abstract | March 24, 2024

Analyzing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Content on Dermatology Fellowship Program Websites

Forrest Bohler, BS, MS2, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI

Allison Garden, BS, OMS3, Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine - Carolinas Campus, Spartanburg, SC; Varna Taranikanti, MD, MS, PhD, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI

Learning Objectives

  1. Identify shortcomings in DEI initiatives on dermatology fellowship program websites
  2. Recognize ways in which improvements can be made across dermatology fellowship programs to attract a diverse pool of applicants

Background: Efforts to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to address healthcare disparities has become a central focus in medical school, residency, and fellowship programs. One way to diversify the workforce is to highlight diversity initiatives through their website by providing detailed information about DEI content so that prospective applicants can evaluate a program’s training, culture, and overall fit. Prior studies show that dermatology residency programs’ websites have a dearth of DEI content.1,2 Little is known, however, if similar findings are to be expected for dermatology fellowship programs. The American Board of Dermatology recognizes three dermatology subspecialties: Dermatopathology, Pediatric Dermatology, and Micrographic Surgery and Dermatologic Oncology (Mohs). The aim of this study is to analyze the presence and characterize the content of DEI information on fellowship websites.

Methods: Fellowship programs were identified using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s online database of fellowship programs. Programs that did not have websites were excluded from this study. A total of 147 programs were analyzed. Programs were evaluated on a standardized scoring system for five equally weighted criteria: fellowship-specific DEI webpage, DEI commitment statement, DEI initiatives (summer research opportunities for under-represented minorities, DEI council, etc.), link to the institution’s DEI homepage, and information about bias training. Data was collected independently by two separate individuals for consistency. Any discrepancies between programs’ scores were discussed and reconciled.

Results: The mean score among all programs was 12.5 (out of a maximum of 100). Pediatric dermatology ranked the highest among all specialties (mean score of 16.8), while Mohs ranked the lowest (mean score of 10.1). A link to the institution’s DEI homepage was the most prevalent factor accounting for 42.1% of all programs collected, whereas information about bias training and fellowship-associated DEI webpage were the least prevalent (3.3%). The remaining factors had a prevalence of 5.9% (DEI initiatives) and 7.9% (DEI commitment statement).

Conclusion/Implications: The results of this study reveal an overall lack of DEI content across all dermatology subspecialties’ webpages and represent an actionable area of improvement for fellowship directors to increase their DEI efforts to attract a diverse pool of applicants to their program.

References and Resources

  1. Mazmudar RS, Vaccarello A, Onamusi T, Sarfo A, Sharma T, Carroll BT. Availability and content of diversity, equity, and inclusion information on dermatology residency program websites. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88(4):891-893. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2022.10.018.
  2. Wei C, Bernstein SA, Gu A, et al. Evaluating Diversity and Inclusion Content on Graduate Medical Education Websites. J Gen Intern Med. 2023;38(3):582-585. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07973-9.
Back to Abstracts