BACKGROUND: The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill was an environmental crisis for which multiple groups, including the United States Coast Guard (USCG), provided emergency response services. A cohort of 5,665 USCG oil spill responders completed postdeployment surveys eliciting information on a variety of topics, including oil spill-related exposures and experiences. Our objective was to determine the most common exposure patterns among USCG responders. METHODS: We used latent class analysis based on six indicator variables reflecting different aspects of the responders experiences: exposure to oil, exposure to engine exhaust fumes or carbon monoxide, hand sanitizer use, sunblock use, mosquito bites, and level of anxiety. We validated our interpretation of these latent classes using ancillary variables. RESULTS: The model distinguished four distinct exposure profiles, which we interpreted as low overall exposure (prevalence estimate = 0.18), low crude oil/exhaust and moderate time outdoors/anxiety (prevalence estimate = 0.18), high crude oil/exhaust and moderate time outdoors/anxiety (prevalence estimate = 0.25), and high overall exposure (prevalence estimate = 0.38). The validation analysis was consistent with our interpretation of the latent classes. CONCLUSIONS: The exposure patterns identified in this analysis can help inform future studies of the health impacts of exposure mixtures among USCG oil spill responders.

Women's health care has evolved significantly since it was first acknowledged as an integral part of internal medicine training more than two decades ago. To update and clarify core competencies in sex- and gender-based women's health for general internists, the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) Women and Medicine Commission prepared the following Position Paper, approved by the SGIM council in 2023. Competencies were developed using several sources, including the 2021 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Program Requirements for Internal Medicine and the 2023 American Board of Internal Medicine Certification Examination Blueprint. These competencies are relevant to the care of patients who identify as women, as well as gender-diverse individuals to whom these principles apply. They align with pivotal advances in women's health and acknowledge the changing context of patients' lives, reaffirming the role of general internal medicine physicians in providing comprehensive care to women.

Background

A set of core competencies in sex- and gender-based women's health (SGWH) has been endorsed by the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM), but many residencies lack the resources to implement curricula and clinical assessments that would support achievement of these competencies.

Aim

Develop entrustable professional activities (EPA) to support implementation and assessment of clinical care for SGIM's SGWH Core Competencies.

Program description

Members of SGIM's SGWH Education Interest Group developed 18 SGWH EPAs for internal medicine residents. A team of clinician educators coordinated the preparation, drafting, quality control, and curriculum alignment of the SGWH EPAs through a rigorous process aligned with best practices for EPAs. All EPAs are mapped to the larger competency domains from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), for use with ACGME Milestones. The authors provide suggestions for the implementation of the EPAs into residency training.

Conclusion

As residency education moves towards a competency-based structure, EPAs are needed to translate broad competencies into observable clinical skills. The SGWH EPAs provide a rigorously developed and ready-made tool for programs to link the SGWH core competencies to residency curriculum development, clinical assessment, and program evaluation.

Background

Recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Programme for the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans has been criticized for several of its evaluations, and also for the approach used to perform these evaluations. Some critics have claimed that failures of IARC Working Groups to recognize study weaknesses and biases of Working Group members have led to inappropriate classification of a number of agents as carcinogenic to humans.

Objectives

The authors of this Commentary are scientists from various disciplines relevant to the identification and hazard evaluation of human carcinogens. We examined criticisms of the IARC classification process to determine the validity of these concerns. Here, we present the results of that examination, review the history of IARC evaluations, and describe how the IARC evaluations are performed.

Discussion

We concluded that these recent criticisms are unconvincing. The procedures employed by IARC to assemble Working Groups of scientists from the various disciplines and the techniques followed to review the literature and perform hazard assessment of various agents provide a balanced evaluation and an appropriate indication of the weight of the evidence. Some disagreement by individual scientists to some evaluations is not evidence of process failure. The review process has been modified over time and will undoubtedly be altered in the future to improve the process. Any process can in theory be improved, and we would support continued review and improvement of the IARC processes. This does not mean, however, that the current procedures are flawed.

Conclusions

The IARC Monographs have made, and continue to make, major contributions to the scientific underpinning for societal actions to improve the public's health.