Integrating health equity into obstetrics and gynecology education

Exploratory insights from students and community advocates

Bibliographic Data

ID22424151
AuthorsFarimata Mbaye-Rolph (Mount Sinai Hospital, corresponding author), Kimberly B Glazer (0000-0002-3318-9802, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania), Frances M Howell (0000-0002-1358-2922, Columbia University), Devin Madden (0000-0003-0669-7841, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai), Devin A Madden, Susan Khalil (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai), Candice Fraser (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai), Cynthia Abraham (0000-0002-2067-9044, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai), Jessica Lang (0000-0001-7802-8546, Columbia University), Toni Stern (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai), T Janevic (0000-0002-9934-4406)
Year2026
Volume26
Issue1
Publication date2026-04-17
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueBMC Medical Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1472-6920 • E-ISSN: 1472-6920
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1186/s12909-026-09205-8
PMID41998690
OpenAlexW7154691327
LanguageEN
References cited18

BACKGROUND: Equity content is increasingly included in medical education, yet learners report difficulty translating these concepts into clinical practice. Obstetrics and gynecology (Ob/Gyn) — given its legacy of reproductive inequity — offers a critical lens to examine current approaches to equity training. Thus, we ask how medical students and community advocates experience current efforts to teach equity and person-centered care in the Ob/Gyn undergraduate curriculum. We also ask for actionable strategies that students and community advocates would recommend for integrating these values in clinical training. METHODS: From 2023 to 2024 we conducted seven exploratory focus groups with medical students (n = 7) and community advocates (n = 17) engaged in social justice work spanning topics in sexual health, reproductive health, disability health, and other advocacy focuses. Participants were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling. Sessions were recorded on HIPAA‐compliant Zoom, transcribed, and analyzed the focus group data. Four coders independently engaged in iterative, phenomenological analysis through immersion in transcripts, reflexive bracketing, and collaborative interpretation to identify themes in shared experiences. RESULTS: Students described equity content as repetitive and disconnected from clinical learning, with limited modeling of inclusive practices during clerkships. Community advocates emphasized how hierarchies, implicit bias, and structural barriers in medical culture perpetuate harm and erode trust, especially in reproductive care. Opportunities for transformation included: (1) reframing the physician’s role from sole expert to listener with expertise; (2) integrating patient narratives and lived experience throughout training; (3) rehearsing sensitive situations; and (4) establishing longitudinal accountability mechanisms to reinforce and evaluate equity practices. CONCLUSIONS: A gap persists between curricular intentions and clinical realities in equity education. To prepare learners for equity‐driven Ob/Gyn practice, training must be clinically integrated, community-informed, and institutionally supported, with embedded patient voices, deliberate skills practice, and mechanisms for accountability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Accountability · Cognitive reframing · Curriculum · Facilitator · Focus group · Health equity · Outreach · Reproductive health · Thematic analysis · Cultural Competency in Health Care · Diversity and Career in Medicine · Reproductive Health and Contraception

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access