Suicide is one of the leading causes of death worldwide and statistical analysis of suicide by profession reveals that physicians and veterinarians experience abnormally high suicide rates. This paper seeks to provide a comprehensive literature review over what some general theories of suicide are, why these professions exhibit high suicide rates, what assistance is currently being provided, and where do these assistance efforts succeed or fail. Moreover, this paper addresses what advancements may be made within these fields to further combat suicide in physicians and veterinarians. To achieve this, general theories behind suicide, risk factors unique to or heavily prevalent in these professions, and current assistance efforts are read, organized, and summarized.<br/><br/>A summary of these risk factors includes stress and mental health disorders accumulated through school and work, personal and professional isolation, access to lethal substances, suicide contagion, exposure to euthanasia, and the role of perfectionism. There are several assistance efforts in place with the most successful ones being highly personalized, but many are still underutilized. Moreover, the stigma of suicide pervades these professions and is addressed by several researchers as something to combat or prevent. Going forward, it is hopeful that not only will more assistance efforts will be created and provided for physicians and veterinarians suffering from suicidal tendencies, but efforts to reduce the stigma of suicide be implemented and utilized as soon as possible.

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.

Every day people dream of becoming doctors; yet, while many know it is a rigorous process to wear a white coat and practice medicine, the true stories of the trenches of medical school are still often untold. This creative project gives medical students chance to have the spotlight, where they will share their own stories of both the ups and downs of their medical school experience and beyond. They were also given the opportunity to reflect and offer insight on if they would do it all over again or what they would change. This story-gathering of these future medical professionals will provide advice on how to get into medical school and tips on how to become a successful doctor, all while providing real-life stories about the people who save lives, and how it has affected them as an individual.

As it currently stands, there are many barriers preventing racial minority students from being accepted into medical school at the same rates as their White peers. This has broad reaching effects that shape how medicine is practiced. In order to help mitigate this issue, different schools and medical groups have begun to develop programs designed to assist students in being accepted into medical school. In this literature review, I further examine these programs by selecting 12 articles to further examine the programs they mentioned. From this examination, trends in the types of programs and the target demographics emerged. The types of programs included academic enrichment, research and lab exposure, mentorship, admissions preparation, counseling, postbaccalaureate or master’s programs, pre-entrance, and recruitment programs. Target demographics varied in age which affected the format of the program. Analyzing different programs revealed the ways in which minority students are currently being assisted and that there is no current standardized measure of the effectiveness of these programs. It will be important to determine effectiveness in order to eliminate these disparities which will be crucial in reducing health disparities nationally.

Mental health conditions can impact college students’ social and academic achievements. As such, students may disclose mental illnesses on medical school applications. Yet, no study has investigated to what extent disclosure of a mental health condition impacts medical school acceptance. We designed an audit study to address this gap. We surveyed 99 potential admissions committee members from at least 43 unique M.D.-granting schools in the U.S. Participants rated a fictitious portion of a medical school application on acceptability, competence, and likeability. They were randomly assigned to a condition: an application that explained a low semester GPA due to a mental health condition, an application that explained a low semester GPA due to a physical health condition, or an application that had a low semester GPA but did not describe any health condition. Using ANOVAs, multinomial regression, and open-coding, we found that committee members do not rate applications lower when a mental health condition is revealed. When asked about their concerns regarding the application, 27.0% of participants who received an application that revealed a mental health condition mentioned it as a concern; 14.7% of participants who received an application that revealed a physical health condition mentioned it as a concern. Committee members were also asked about when revealing a mental health condition would be beneficial and when it would be detrimental. This work indicates that medical school admissions committee members do not exhibit a bias towards mental health conditions and provides recommendations on how to discuss mental illness on medical school applications.