Megan M. Gray

Objective This study aimed to characterize implicit bias (IB) and health disparities (HD) education in neonatal–perinatal medicine (NPM), including current educational opportunities, resources, and barriers. Study Design A national web-based survey was sent to NPM fellows, neonatologists, and frontline providers after iterative review by education experts from the National Neonatology Curriculum Committee. Quantitative data were analyzed with chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Qualitative data were evaluated using thematic analysis. Results Of the 452 NPM survey respondents, most desired additional IB (76%) and HD (83%) education. A greater proportion of neonatologists than fellows received IB (83 vs. 57%) and HD (87 vs. 74%) education. Only 41% of neonatologists reported that their institution requires IB training. A greater proportion of fellows than neonatologists expressed dissatisfaction with the current approaches for IB (51 vs. 25%, p < 0.001) and HD (43 vs. 25%, p = 0.015) education. The leading drivers of dissatisfaction included insufficient time spent on the topics, lack of specificity to NPM, inadequate curricular scope or depth, and lack of local educator expertise. A minority of faculty who were tasked to educate others have received specific educator training on IB (21%) and HD (16%). Thematic analysis of survey free-text responses identified three main themes on the facilitators and barriers to successful IB and HD education: individual, environmental, and curricular design variables. Conclusion NPM trainees and neonatologists desire tailored, active, and expert-guided IB and HD education. Identified barriers are important to address in developing an effective IB/HD curriculum for the NPM community. Key Points