Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Why Simultaneous Voting Makes for Good Decisions
How can organizations make robust decisions when time is short, and the stakes are high? It’s a conundrum not unfamiliar to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Back in 2021, the FDA found itself under tremendous pressure to decide on the approval of the experimental drug aducanumab, designed to slow the progress of Alzheimer’s disease—a debilitating and incurable condition that ranks among the top 10 causes of death in the United States. Welcomed by the market as a game-changer on its release, aducanumab quickly ran into serious problems. A lack of data on clinical efficacy along with a slew of dangerous side effects meant physicians in their droves were unwilling to prescribe it. Within months of its approval, three FDA advisors resigned in protest, one calling aducanumab, “the worst approval decision that the FDA has made that I can remember.” By the start of 2024, the drug had been pulled by its manufacturers. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight and data from the public’s use of aducanumab, it is easy for us to tell that FDA made the wrong decision then. But is there a better process that would have given FDA the foresight to make the right decision, under limited information? The FDA routinely has to evaluate novel drugs and treatments; medical and pharmaceutical products that can impact the wellbeing of millions of Americans. With stakes this high, the FDA is known to tread carefully: assembling different advisory, review, and funding committees providing diverse knowledge and expertise to assess the evidence and decide whether to approve a new drug, or not. As a federal agency, the FDA is also required to maintain scrupulous records that cover its decisions, and how those decisions are made. The Impact of Voting Mechanisms on Decision Quality Some of this data has been analyzed by Goizueta’s Tian Heong Chan, associate professor of information systems and operation management. Together with Panos Markou of the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, Chan scrutinized 17 years’ worth of information, including detailed transcripts from more than 500 FDA advisory committee meetings, to understand the mechanisms and protocols used in FDA decision-making: whether committee members vote to approve products sequentially, with everyone in the room having a say one after another; or if voting happens simultaneously via the push of a button, say, or a show of hands. Chan and Markou also looked at the impact of sequential versus simultaneous voting to see if there were differences in the quality of the decisions each mechanism produced. Their findings are singular. It turns out that when stakeholders vote simultaneously, they make better decisions. Drugs or products approved this way are far less likely to be issued post-market boxed warnings (warnings issued by FDA that call attention to potentially serious health risks associated with the product, that must be displayed on the prescription box itself), and more than two times less likely to be recalled. The FDA changed its voting protocols in 2007, when they switched from sequentially voting around the room, one person after another, to simultaneous voting procedures. And the results are stunning. Tian Heong Chan, Associate Professor of Information Systems & Operation Management “Decisions made by simultaneous voting are more than twice as effective,” says Chan. “After 2007, you see that just 3.4% of all drugs and products approved this way end up being discontinued or recalled. This compares with an 8.6% failure rate for drugs approved by the FDA using more sequential processes—the round robin where individuals had been voting one by one around the room.” Imagine you are told beforehand that you are going to vote on something important by simply raising your hand or pressing a button. In this scenario, you are probably going to want to expend more time and effort in debating all the issues and informing yourself before you decide. Tian Heong Chan “On the other hand, if you know the vote will go around the room, and you will have a chance to hear how others’ speak and explain their decisions, you’re going to be less motivated to exchange and defend your point of view beforehand,” says Chan. In other words, simultaneous decision-making is two times less likely to generate a wrong decision as the sequential approach. Why is this? Chan and Markou believe that these voting mechanisms impact the quality of discussion and debate that undergird decision-making; that the quality of decisions is significantly impacted by how those decisions are made. Quality Discussion Leads to Quality Decisions Parsing the FDA transcripts for content, language, and tonality in both settings, Chan and Markou find evidence to support this. Simultaneous voting or decision-making drives discussions that are characterized by language that is more positive, more authentic, and more even in terms of expressions of authority and hierarchy, says Chan. What’s more, these deliberations and exchanges are deeper and more far-ranging in quality. We find marked differences in the tone of speech and the topics discussed when stakeholders know they will be voting simultaneously. There is less hierarchy in these exchanges, and individuals exhibit greater confidence in sharing their points of view more freely. Tian Heong Chan “We also see more questions being asked, and a broader range of topics and ideas discussed,” says Chan. In this context, decision-makers are also less likely to reach unanimous agreement. Instead, debate is more vigorous and differences of opinion remain more robust. Conversely, sequential voting around the room is typically preceded by shorter discussion in which stakeholders share fewer opinions and ask fewer questions. And this demonstrably impacts the quality of the decisions made, says Chan. Sharing a different perspective to a group requires effort and courage. With sequential voting or decision-making, there seems to be less interest in surfacing diverse perspectives or hidden aspects to complex problems. Tian Heong Chan “So it’s not that individuals are being influenced by what other people say when it comes to voting on the issue—which would be tempting to infer—rather, it’s that sequential voting mechanisms seem to take a bit more effort out of the process.” When decision-makers are told that they will have a chance to vote and to explain their vote, one after another, their incentives to make a prior effort to interrogate each other vigorously, and to work that little bit harder to surface any shortcomings in their own understanding or point of view, or in the data, are relatively weaker, say Chan and Markou. The Takeaway for Organizations Making High-Stakes Decisions Decision-making in different contexts has long been the subject of scholarly scrutiny. Chan and Markou’s research sheds new light on the important role that different mechanisms have in shaping the outcomes of decision-making—and the quality of the decisions that are jointly taken. And this should be on the radar of organizations and institutions charged with making choices that impact swathes of the community, they say. “The FDA has a solid tradition of inviting diversity into its decision-making. But the data shows that harnessing the benefits of diversity is contingent on using the right mechanisms to surface the different expertise you need to be able to see all the dimensions of the issue, and make better informed decisions about it,” says Chan. A good place to start? By a concurrent show of hands. Tian Heong Chan is an associate professor of information systems and operation management. he is available to speak about this topic - click on his con now to arrange an interview today.
In another milestone commitment to community health, ChristianaCare today announced a $1.6 million investment in 25 local nonprofits, unveiling the recipients of its Community Investment Fund during a special celebration at The Ministry of Caring in Wilmington. Since 2019, ChristianaCare’s Community Investment Fund has provided more than $5.6 million to 64 organizations, addressing social, behavioral and environmental health factors. ”ChristianaCare is empowering and supporting our nonprofit partners so they can help meet the many needs of the people they serve, and work with us to improve patient health and create healthy communities and a healthy Delaware,” said Bettina Tweardy Riveros, chief health equity officer at ChristianaCare. This year’s recipients received funding to support health improvement initiatives in neighboring communities and address critical issues and community needs. “Each of these recipients is making a significant and positive impact by addressing critical health challenges throughout our communities, including food insecurity, housing insecurity and environmental health. At ChristianaCare, we are honored to be joining forces with these 25 organizations to provide them with more resources so that they do more for those in need. It is another way we care for our community,” she said. The funded initiatives will be implemented throughout the upcoming year and were selected based on the quality of applicants’ proposals and implementation plans, and on the alignment of their proposals with the critical issues prioritized by the community in ChristianaCare’s Community Health Needs Assessment and Community Health Implementation Plan. Recipient Spotlight: Healthy Food for Healthy Kids "The impact of ChristianaCare’s 2024 Community Investment Awards funds on Healthy Foods for Healthy Kids will be felt not only in 2025 but for years to come. This funding will expand our program to an additional school, serving over 600 more students, and support data and research for future growth." Healthy Food for Healthy Kids, Lydia Sarson, Executive Director. Recipient Spotlight: Project New Start “Approximately 85% of the justice-involved individuals served by Project New Start are housing and food insecure. With ChristianaCare’s 2024 Community Investment Fund Award to Project New Start, which began 11/01/24, we have already been able to assist 23 individuals with clothing and household goods; 20 individuals with transportation assistance; 17 individuals with food support; and 7 individuals with housing as of 12/31/24. The impact of these funds cannot be overstated as this investment by ChristianaCare provides Project New Start the means to provide the critical basic needs an individual requires to live with dignity without the trauma of worrying about where they will sleep, how they will eat and how they can sustain employment. We are so grateful to ChristianaCare for their ongoing support.” Priscilla Turgon, Founder and Executive Director of Project New Start, Inc. Recipient Spotlight: YMCA of Delaware - Central YMCA Supportive Housing Program “The Central YMCA Supportive Housing Program, in partnership with Christiana Care, serves low-income men at risk of homelessness who often face trauma, addiction, disabilities or lack of family support. Through stable housing, nutritious meals, welcome packages, rental assistance and supportive activities, the program fosters community wellbeing, improves health outcomes, prevents homelessness and empowers residents to achieve self-sufficiency.” Jimia Redden, Executive Director of Housing. This year’s Community Investment Fund recipients are: • AIDS Delaware: AIDS Delaware’s mission is to eliminate the spread and stigma of HIV/AIDS, improve the lives of those living with HIV/AIDS and promote community health through comprehensive and culturally sensitive services, education programs and advocacy. • Black Mothers in Power: Black Mothers in Power seeks to eradicate racial health disparities for Black birthing people and Black babies throughout Delaware. • Boys & Girls Club of DE: Boys & Girls Clubs of Delaware inspires and enables young people, especially those most in need, to reach their full potential as productive, responsible, caring citizens. • Children and Families First DE: Children & Families First is one of Delaware's oldest and most trusted non-profit leaders in providing the supports and services children and their families need to thrive. • Claymont Community Center - Brandywine Resource Council: Claymont Community Center is a base for a variety of community organizations supporting educational, social, recreational, cultural, personal development, financial and wellness needs. • Delaware Center for Horticulture: The Delaware Center for Horticulture cultivates greener communities by inspiring appreciation and improvement of the environment through horticulture, education and conservation. • Delaware Futures, Inc: Delaware Futures empowers at-promise high school and middle school youth across the state of Delaware by providing year-round, trauma-informed curricula tailored to students at each grade level. • Delaware Nature Society: Delaware Nature Society connects people and nature to create a healthy environment for all through education, conservation and advocacy. • Do Care Doula: Do Care Doula provides grant-funded Doula training and development, subsidized Doula support and a variety of community outreach programs. • Healthy Food for Healthy Kids: Healthy Food for Healthy Kids supports educators in Delaware, bringing life-lasting benefits of gardening and good nutrition to kids. • Jefferson Street Center: The mission of JSC is to advance community-driven priorities in Northwest Wilmington that promote the conditions necessary for all residents to thrive. • Latin American Community Center: LACC seeks to empower members to become contributing members of society through advocacy and offers programs and services to anyone ages of one to 101. • Milford Housing Development Corporation: Milford Housing Development Corporation is a value-driven, nonprofit, affordable housing developer, providing services throughout Delaware. Its mission is to provide decent, safe, affordable housing solutions to people of modest means. • Ministry of Caring: Since Brother Ronald began the ministry in 1977 with the first shelter for homeless women on the Delmarva Peninsula, the Ministry has worked ceaselessly to ease the needs and struggles of our neighbors. • ONCOR Coalition: ONCOR’s vision is to build and promote spaces that connect people to the city and each other. It promotes positive relationships through community-based educational programs and recreational opportunities. • Our Daily Bread Dining Room of MOT: ODB is the only soup kitchen in the Middletown, Odessa and Townsend region. ODB is a volunteer run organization with over 300 volunteers. Volunteers help purchase and pick up food and ingredients, prepare and serve meals and clean and maintain the facility. • Project New Start: Project New Start provides a comprehensive cognitive behavioral change/workforce development initiative for individuals transitioning out of state and federal institutions. • Ray of Hope Mission Center: Ray of Hope’s mission is to recognize and address the needs of those who are struggling within our community and assist them in their efforts to provide for themselves and their families, both physically and spiritually. • St. Patrick's Center: Serving people in Wilmington’s East Side neighborhood since 1971, St. Patrick’s Center is a nonprofit organization that operates a Senior Center, and provides meals, groceries, clothing, paratransit and social service support to the public. • The Resurrection Center: The purpose of the Resurrection Center is to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ and create a spirit-filled environment that hungers for the Gospel and to serve as liberating agents in the midst of the world. • Voices of Hope: Voices of Hope’s mission is to empower lives and foster recovery. The nonprofit is dedicated to supporting individuals and families facing substance use disorder. Through compassion, education and community engagement, Voices of Hope strives to break the chains of addiction, promoting a healthier, brighter future for all. • West End Neighborhood House: At West End Neighborhood House, staff, clients, volunteers and donors work together to resolve complex social challenges throughout Delaware. Through outcomes-driven programming, the West End Neighborhood House provide support that meets community needs in finances, housing, education, employment and family services. • Westside Family Healthcare: Westside Family Healthcare is a community-minded, non-partisan health center located in Delaware. Westside opened its doors in 1988 and has maintained status as a Federally Qualified Health Center since 1994. • Wilmington HOPE Commission Inc.: The Hope Commission is a reentry program that helps formerly incarcerated men return to their community. It offers support services that address factors known to lead to repeat offenses. • YMCA of Delaware: The Central YMCA Supportive Housing Program offers housing for men aged 18 and older. Residents benefit from dorm-style accommodations, discounted access to the fitness center and connections to a range of health and human service providers in partnership with the YMCA.
Researchers looked at trust in scientists in 68 countries and found relatively high levels of trust everywhere The TISP Many Labs study of 71,922 people included those living in under-researched nations of the Global South The majority of survey participants believe that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. Public trust in scientists is still high, according to a survey carried out in 68 countries by an international team of 241 researchers, led by Dr Viktoria Cologna (Harvard University, ETH Zurich) and Dr Niels Mede (University of Zurich). The study found no evidence of the oft-repeated claim of a crisis of trust in science. The team, which included Aston University School of Psychology’s Dr James Reynolds and Dr Charlotte Pennington, also found that the majority of survey participants believed that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. This study is the result of the Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) Many Labs study, a collaborative effort that allowed the authors to survey 71,922 people in 68 countries, including many under-researched countries in the ‘Global South’. For the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic, the study provides global, representative survey data on the populations and regions of the world in which researchers are perceived to be most trustworthy, the extent to which they should engage with the public and whether science is prioritising important research issues. Dr Mede said: “The study is the most comprehensive post-pandemic snapshot of trust in scientists, societal expectations of their involvement in society and policymaking and public views on research priorities.” Across 68 countries, the study finds that the majority of the public has a relatively high level of trust in scientists (mean trust level = 3.62, on a scale of 1 = very low trust to 5 = very high trust). The majority of respondents also perceive scientists as qualified (78%), honest (57%) and concerned about people’s wellbeing (56%). However, the results also reveal some areas of concern. Globally, less than half of respondents (42%) believe that scientists pay attention to the views of others. Additionally, many people felt that the priorities of science are not always well-aligned with their own priorities. The researchers call upon scientists to take the results seriously and find ways to be more receptive to feedback and more open to dialogue. The findings confirm the results of previous studies that show significant differences between countries and population groups. In particular, people with right-wing political views in Western countries tend to have less trust in scientists than those with left-wing views. This suggests that attitudes toward science tend to polarise along political lines. In most countries, however, political orientation and trust in scientists were not related. A majority of respondents want science to play an active role in society and policymaking. Globally, 83% of respondents believe that scientists should communicate with the public about science, providing an impetus for increased science communication efforts. Only a minority (23%) believe that scientists should not actively advocate for specific policies. 52% believe that scientists should be more involved in the policymaking process. Participants gave high priority to research to improve public health, solve energy problems and reduce poverty. On the other hand, research to develop defence and military technology was given a lower priority. In fact, participants explicitly believe that science is prioritising the development of defence and military technology more than they would like, highlighting a potential misalignment between public and scientific priorities. Dr Cologna said: “Our results show that most people in most countries have relatively high trust in scientists and want them to play an active role in society and policymaking”. Dr Reynolds, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This research demonstrates that people from all around the globe still have high trust in science and want scientists involved in policymaking. When we face great challenges, such as threats to public health or energy crises, the public recognise the importance that scientists can play and want us involved. This is also true of the UK where levels of public trust in science is one of the highest globally.” Dr Pennington, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This project showcases the importance and power of big team science to answer fundamental questions about human behaviour. By pooling our expertise and resources, we were able to reach over 70,000 people and improve sample diversity and representation by recruiting from 68 countries. Overall, the study resulted in an optimistic finding – that people generally trust scientists and agree that they should engage more in society and policymaking. Such trust is important because it allows people to make research-informed decisions about their own lives.” Find out more about the research in Nature Human Behaviour by visiting https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02090-5.
The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project was carried out in conjunction with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England Paediatric critical care (PCC) staff experience high levels of moral distress, post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout Two simple, low-resource wellbeing sessions can be delivered by staff for staff without specialist training. The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project, led by Aston University researchers in collaboration with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England, has developed two simple, easy-to-deliver sessions to improve the wellbeing of staff in paediatric critical care (PCC) units in UK hospitals. PCC staff are known to experience high levels of moral distress, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and burnout, but often feel little is offered to help them with their mental health. The SWell team at Aston University, led by Professor Rachel Shaw from the Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment, realised following a literature review that there are no existing, evidence-based interventions specifically designed to improve PCC staff wellbeing. Initial work by SWell identified the ‘active ingredients’ likely to create successful intervention designs. Together with a team from NHS England, the Aston University researchers set up the SWell Collaborative Project: Interventions for Staff Wellbeing in Paediatric Critical Care, in PCC units across England and Scotland. The aim of the project was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing wellbeing interventions for staff working in PCC in UK hospitals. In total, 14 of the 28 UK PCC units were involved. One hundred and four intervention sessions were run, attended by 573 individuals. Professor Shaw said: “The significance of healthcare staff wellbeing was brought to the surface during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it’s a problem that has existed far longer than that. As far as we could see researchers had focused on measuring the extent of the problem rather than coming up with possible solutions. The SWell project was initiated to understand the challenges to wellbeing when working in paediatric critical care, to determine what staff in that high-pressure environment need, and what could actually work day-to-day to make a difference. Seeing PCC staff across half the paediatric critical care units in the UK show such enthusiasm and commitment to make the SWell interventions a success has been one of the proudest experiences in my academic career to date.” The two wellbeing sessions tested are low-resource and low-intensity, and can be delivered by staff for staff without any specialist qualifications. In the session ‘Wellbeing Images’, a small group of staff is shown images representing wellbeing, with a facilitated discussion using appreciative inquiry - a way of structuring discussions to create positive change in a system or situation by focusing on what works well, rather than what is wrong. In the ‘Mad-Sad-Glad’ session, another small group reflective session, participants explore what makes them feel mad, sad and glad, and identify positive actions to resolve any issues raised. The key ingredients in both sessions are social support – providing a psychologically safe space where staff can share their sensitive experiences and emotions without judgement, providing support for each other; self-belief – boosting staff’s self-confidence and ability to identify and express their emotions in response to work; and feedback and monitoring – encouraging staff to monitor what increases their stress, when they experience challenging emotions, and what might help boost their wellbeing in those scenarios. Feedback from staff both running and participating in the SWell interventions was very positive, with high satisfaction and feasibility ratings. Participants like that the session facilitated open and honest discussions, provided opportunities to connect with colleagues and offered opportunities for generating solutions and support. One hospital staff member responsible for delivering the sessions said: “Our staff engaged really well, and it created a buzz around the unit with members of the team asking if they could be ‘swelled' on shift. A really positive experience and we are keeping it as part of our staff wellbeing package.” The team concluded that even on busy PCC units, it is feasible to deliver SWell sessions. In addition, following the sessions, staff wellbeing and depression scores improved, indicating their likely positive impact on staff. Further evaluations are needed to determine whether positive changes can be sustained over time following the SWell sessions. The work was funded by Aston University Proof of Concept Fund and NHS England. Donna Austin, an advanced critical care practitioner at University Hospital Southampton paediatric intensive care unit, said: “We were relatively new to implementing wellbeing initiatives, but we recognised the need for measures to be put in place for an improvement in staff wellbeing, as staff had described burnout, stress and poor mood. SWell has enabled our unit to become more acutely aware of the needs of the workforce and adapt what we deliver to suit the needs of the staff where possible. Staff morale and retention has been the greatest outcomes from us participating in the SWell study and ongoing SWell related interventions.” Read the paper about the SWell interventions in the journal Nursing in Critical Care at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nicc.13228. For more information about SWell, visit the website.
Image Credit: Petrovich9/Getty Images Plus Although time is a set duration of hours, minutes and seconds, the perception of time can vary dramatically based on the individual and especially during times of high stress and uncertainty such as disasters, recessions and most recently the COVID-19 lockdown. For example, ask anyone when a specific event occurred during the pandemic and they are likely to respond with, “That happened three months ago. Or did that happen three years ago?” While there have been studies on the feeling that there is not enough time or experiencing time as moving too slowly, Baylor University sociologists Matthew Andersson, Ph.D., and Paul Froese, Ph.D., investigated this sense of multifaceted time perceptions during the pandemic and their effects on mental well-being. Their findings – using national Gallup data collected in spring 2021 in the middle of the pandemic – were published in the journal Time & Society. “We know from existing research that people often experience time in altered ways whenever disasters strike, and we wanted to see if that was true during the pandemic as well,” Andersson said. The Baylor researchers found that Americans during the pandemic generally reported some degree of feeling rushed while also perceiving multiple types of time distortion involving slowness, quickness and days and weeks blending together. This disorientation also was frequently reported alongside other pandemic-related stressors, including economic strain, working from home, homeschooling a child and severe household conflict. Together, they complicated how people perceive time by disrupting routines and creating experiences of trauma, adding to the decline in mental well-being and an increase in feelings of loneliness. Time disorientation and mental well-being The top three findings of the study all demonstrate the connection between altered time perception and the mental states of an individual. “If time does not seem to be moving ‘normally,’ it is generally related to lower levels of mental well-being, such as increased depressive, anxiety symptoms or a lessened sense of control,” Andersson said. “We think this is because people tend to feel grounded or calm when they feel like time is moving as it should.” Secondly, the researchers found that individuals can often experience these time disorientations in multiple and contradictory ways, which can be related to even lower well-being. “Feeling rushed and feeling that time is slow are kind of opposites, but they are both related to having this sense of multifaceted blending of time,” Froese said. “We can show very clearly how these new stresses that were brought on by the pandemic created heightened senses of disorientation in terms of time.” More importantly, they found these time disorientations were affected by social, familial, physical and work situations, which created lower levels of mental well-being. “Specific forms of stress we were seeing during the pandemic, such as financial hardship, homeschooling, working from home and severe household conflict, all had relationships to experiencing different kinds of time distortions,” said Andersson. This was more evident in younger people “because it [lockdown] probably upended their daily routines in a much more dramatic way than it would have in somebody who's retired,” said Froese. Experience of time The rushed pace of industrialized society existed before the COVID-19 pandemic, but the stressors associated with the pandemic added to the feelings of time being out of control. “Our approach to capturing experiences of time rests on the assumption that individuals relate to time in complex ways,” Froese said. “We found original evidence to suggest that experiences of quickness, being rushed, slowness and indistinct boundaries of days all coincide, and that these multiple disorientations each relate to diminished mental wellbeing, to objective work and family demands, and to widespread exposures to pandemic-related stressors.” The survey was conducted as part of the Baylor Religion Survey, one of the most extensive national surveys of American religious beliefs, values and behaviors that produces unique data concerning religion, health and community in America today. The 2021 data collection by Gallup contained a section devoted to how the pandemic affected Americans’ activities, including how the pandemic changed the emotional lives of Americans. Looking to know more? We can help. Dr. Paul Froese is a professor of sociology and a research fellow for the Institute for Studies of Religion. He has been teaching and researching at Baylor since 2002. Dr. Matthew Andersson’s research focuses on health inequality as it unfolds across the life course. Specifically, he researches educational and socioeconomic inequalities in mental and physical well-being as they relate to childhood, adolescent and adulthood factors. Both experts are available to speak with media about this important topic - simply click on either expert's icon to arrange an interview time today.
Maureen Leffler, D.O., Named ChristianaCare’s Chief Wellbeing Officer
Maureen “Mo” Leffler, D.O., MPH, has been appointed chief wellbeing officer of ChristianaCare, effective Nov. 25. In her role, Leffler leads the ChristianaCare Center for WorkLife Wellbeing and strategies to enhance the professional fulfillment and well-being of ChristianaCare’s nearly 14,000 caregivers, overseeing advocacy programs and initiatives to optimize their experience and foster a culture of well-being throughout the organization. She works closely with leaders across key departments to address factors impacting caregiver well-being. Leffler most recently served as the inaugural chief wellbeing officer at Nemours Children’s Health, where she helped the organization to achieve the 2022 Joy in Medicine distinction from the American Medical Association for prioritizing proven efforts to enhance the professional fulfillment of physicians. There, she established a Center for Associate Wellbeing; led the first systemwide assessment to strategically address well-being and burnout; and implemented a peer support program and expanded the scope of resources available to support the emotional and mental health needs of employees. In collaboration with organizational leaders, she supported targeted clinical team assessments and systems-based interventions to foster well-being. Prior to this role, Leffler served as a pediatric rheumatologist at Nemours and as an assistant professor of pediatrics in the Division of Rheumatology at Thomas Jefferson University. Since 2017, Leffler has served as the course director of the Chief Resident Leadership Training Program for the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, she co-chaired ACGME’s National Task Force on Well-Being. She and her team developed a national graduate medical education well-being community, which she continues to convene, to understand the evolving challenges and share strategies to improve well-being. She represents the ACGME as a coach for the National Academy of Medicine Action Collaborative on Clinical Well-Being and Resilience. She also serves as a consultant to the Professional Satisfaction team at the American Medical Association. Leffler earned her medical degree from the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, followed by a residency in pediatrics at Nemours and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, where she served as chief resident. She subsequently trained in pediatric rheumatology at Nemours and Jefferson. She also earned a Master of Public Health from Temple University and studied chemistry at St. Joseph’s University. Recently, Leffler completed the Georgetown Executive Leadership Certification Program.
University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication unveils new vision, goals and leadership
The University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication (CPC) is excited to announce a transformative new chapter with the unveiling of its updated vision, goals and leadership for 2024 and beyond. Since its founding in 2010, the CPC has been at the forefront of innovative public opinion research on politics and media, always with an eye towards protecting and improving American democracy. With this new chapter, the CPC is actively integrating political psychology (the study of how and why people make political judgments and form political beliefs) into the study of public opinion and media effects. “Our vision is responsible democracy-centered journalism informed by our rigorous research on Americans’ thoughts, feelings, knowledge and behaviors,” says Dr. Dannagal Young, incoming Director of the Center for Political Communication. “In a few weeks, will be releasing new data on Americans’ knowledge and beliefs about abortion – an issue on which there are widespread misperceptions. Later this fall we are also launching an interdisciplinary initiative to understand the relationship between Americans’ personal wellbeing and their support for democratic institutions and norms.” By producing high-quality research at the intersection of media, politics and psychology, the CPC strives to elevate public conversations and inform news coverage to improve democratic health. Additionally, the Center seeks to serve as a vital resource for journalists, offering expert commentary and empirical data to encourage democratically responsible journalism. With this new direction comes new leadership, bringing together a team of esteemed scholars from Political Science, Communication and Journalism: Director Dr. Dannagal Young, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, TED speaker, and author of Wrong: How Media, Politics, and Identity Drive our Appetite for Misinformation (Johns Hopkins, 2023) and Irony and Outrage: The Polarized Landscape of Rage, Fear, and Laugher in the U.S. (Oxford, 2020). Areas of Expertise: Misinformation, Political Satire, American Politics, the Psychology of Media Effects. Associate Director Dr. Erin Cassese, Professor in the Departments of Political Science and International Relations, Communication, and Women and Gender Studies, co-author of Abortion Attitudes and Polarization in the American Electorate (Cambridge, 2024). Areas of Expertise: Gender, Abortion, Public Opinion, Campaigns and Elections. Director of Research Dr. Phil Jones, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, current Editor-in-Chief at Public Opinion Quarterly. Areas of Expertise: Electoral Politics and Public Opinion. Director of Engagement Dr. Lindsay Hoffman, Associate Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, and research leader for the American Council of Trustees and Alumni two-year Braver Angels project funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Areas of Expertise: Communication across Difference, Media Technologies, and Political Participation. Delaware Politics Director Dr. Paul Brewer, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, co-author of Science in the Media: Popular Images and Public Perceptions (Routledge, 2021), former editor of the International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Areas of Expertise: Delaware Politics, Media effects, Political and Science Communication, Public Opinion, and Perceptions of Science. Delaware Debate Director: Nancy Karibjanian, Director of the University of Delaware’s Journalism program, faculty member in the Department of Communication, and former Director of the CPC with 30 years of broadcast experience. Areas of Expertise: Broadcast Journalism, and Delaware Debates. The CPC’s goals reflect its commitment to a vibrant and collaborative research environment that engages scholars and students at all levels. The CPC will continue to spearhead interdisciplinary research across the domains of communication, political psychology, public opinion, media effects, and public policy. The Center offers applied research opportunities for both graduate and undergraduate students in communication and political science, as well as an undergraduate minor in political communication, thus mentoring the next generation of scholars and practitioners. The CPC is proud to put its academic research to work in service of American democratic health.
University of Delaware experts share insights and strategies for navigating the upcoming school year
The College of Education and Human Development in the University of Delaware has a number of stories and experts for the upcoming school year. Stories Bridging the language gap: How AWE software fosters inclusivity for English Language Learners and Non-English Language Learners alike Creating a mindful classroom: Tips for teachers on how to have a peaceful transition into the 2024-2025 school year Empowering Black and Latinx Boys in Their Postsecondary Journeys: The Role of School Communities UD assistant professor Eric Layland shares new research on LGBTQ+ developmental milestones and supporting LGBTQ+ youth University of Delaware assistant professor explores the tensions between hopes and expectations in vocational planning for autistic young adults Experts Allison Karpyn – an associate professor who can speak to topics related to hunger, obesity, school food, supermarket access, and food insecurity. She has spoken extensively about food in schools and can offer context to those subjects. Roderick Carey – an assistant professor whose current interdisciplinary research serves to make sense of the school experiences of black and Latino adolescent boys and young men in urban contexts. He can also talk about teacher education as it relates to men in the field/the impact of male teachers. To contact Karpyn or Carey, click their profiles. More experts... If you would like to pursue any of these stories or speak to any of the following experts, they are all willing and excited to chat. Contact mediarelations@udel.edu to speak to them. Eric Layland – an assistant professor who can speak about LGBTQ+ student experiences from a research perspective. His work bridges LGBTQ+ developmental research to community impact through developmentally-informed, affirmative interventions. Sarah Mallory – an assistant professor who specializes in special education with a special focus on autism and other intellectual and developmental disabilities. She also works within the Center for Disabilities Studies. Sarah Curtiss – an assistant professor who specializes in special education with a special focus on autistic youth. Brittany Zakszeski – an assistant professor and nationally certified school psychologist, licensed psychologist and behavior analyst. She focuses on student and teacher mental health and can comment on what concealed weapons carried by teachers can do for the mental wellbeing of both students and teachers. Lauren Bailes – an associate professor who focuses on the ways in which organizational, social-cognitive, and leadership theory unite to promote the success of school leaders and K-12 students. Bryan VanGronigen – an assistant professor who specializes in organizational resilience and change management in K-12 schools with specific interest areas in efforts to improve schools, the preparation and professional development of educational leaders and educational policy analyses. Lynsey Gibbons – an associate professor specializing in mathematics education, in teacher professional learning and school partnerships across content areas. Contact mediarelations@udel.edu to speak to these experts or for more information on the stories above.
ChristianaCare, Delaware’s Largest Private Employer, Raises Minimum Wage to $16.50 an Hour
ChristianaCare has increased its minimum wage to $16.50 an hour effective July 21, 2024. The new $16.50 per hour minimum wage exceeds federal, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and Pennsylvania minimum wage rates. “At ChristianaCare, we are committed to creating health so that people can flourish, and that begins with our caregivers,” said ChristianaCare System Chief Operating Officer Ric Cuming, Ed.D., RN, NEA-BC, FAAN. “By investing in our caregivers and supporting their wellbeing, we support their ability to provide the very best care to our patients." ChristianaCare is the largest private employer in Delaware with nearly 14,000 employees. This is the second time in recent years that ChristianaCare has raised its minimum wage; in 2019, ChristianaCare was among the first health systems in the region to raise its minimum wage to $15/hour. This new increase to ChristianaCare’s minimum wage impacts approximately 850 caregivers who were below or near $16.50/hour. Download "It's important for us to lead by example in paying wages that support the financial wellbeing of our workforce,” said Chris Cowan, MEd, FABC, ChristianaCare’s Chief Human Resources Officer. "Substantially increasing wages is one way we continue to attract and keep top talent at all levels in this highly competitive market. By recognizing the valuable contributions of our caregivers, we can enhance staff retention, boost morale and support an exceptional experience for everyone we serve.” The increase is a part of ChristianaCare’s overall Total Rewards package for its caregivers, which includes a wide variety of benefits and support for caregivers and their families through all stages of life. Learn more about ChristianaCare’s Total Rewards here.
Wilmington Campus Receives $1 Million Donation From the Rocco A. and Mary Abessinio Foundation
ChristianaCare has received a $1 million gift from The Rocco A. and Mary Abessinio Foundation Inc. in support of ChristianaCare’s Wilmington Campus. “All families and communities deserve the excellent care that Wilmington Hospital and ChristianaCare provide,” said Rocco and Mary Abessinio. “It is an honor for our family to support the health and wellbeing of the Wilmington community.” The funds will support areas of greatest need, including the expansion of patient care initiatives aimed at reducing disparities in screening and treatment for cancer and cardiovascular disease in the city of Wilmington. “We are tremendously grateful to the Rocco A. and Mary Abessinio Foundation for their continued, generous support of the Wilmington Campus – a vital resource serving the greater Wilmington community,” said Janice Nevin, M.D., MPH, ChristianaCare president and CEO. “With their help, we are closing gaps in health disparities and improving health for everyone, including some of Delaware’s most vulnerable populations.” The Rocco A. and Mary Abessinio Foundation provided a $1 million gift in 2014 for the redesign and renovation of the health center, which was then named the Rocco A. Abessinio Family Health Center at Wilmington Hospital. The health center is home to three primary care practices and other programs and services that offer high-quality health care, wellness and preventive health visits for people of all ages, regardless of their income or ability to pay. “As a result of the Abessinio family’s longstanding partnership and investment in our mission of service, we are making significant progress in addressing disparities and building strong and healthy communities,” said LeRoi S. Hicks, M.D., MPH, FACP, campus executive director of ChristianaCare’s Wilmington Hospital. A Wilmington landmark in the heart of the city, the ChristianaCare Wilmington Hospital has been serving the diverse medical needs of the city and surrounding region for over 125 years. “Philanthropy is essential to ChristianaCare’s mission of service to our community, and we extend our heartfelt thanks and appreciation to Rocco and Mary Abessinio for their inspiring and visionary philanthropic leadership in support of the Wilmington Campus,” said Dia Williams Adams, MPA, vice president of philanthropy at ChristianaCare. “Their gift is a legacy that not only allows us to increase our ability to make a positive impact on patients and community, but honors the incredible work that our caregivers do every day.” For more information about ways to support ChristianaCare’s mission of service to the community, visit: https://christianacare.org/us/en/make-a-gift.