Podcasts about Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Rev. Jo Murphy, UU Mass Action, preaching Worship service given February 15, 2026 Prayer by Rev. Erica Federspiel Richmond, Parish Minister https://firstparish.info/ First Parish A liberal religious community, welcoming to all First gathered 1739 In a world where devastation is palpable every day, it is often difficult not to default to despair and fear. Though this despair is so present, I find there is hope in letting yourself grieve. Join me in investigating the importance of not defaulting to fear and despair, but to find space to grieve and then move from grief to justice work, finding joy and wonder in it all, sustaining ourselves and our communities. The First Parish Choir, accompanied by Kenneth Seitz, will offer music. Rev. Jo Murphy is the Executive Director for UU Mass Action and with passion and zest mobilizes and organizes with the many UU Mass Action campaigns. Jo is also kept busy as a chaplain at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston and caring for her 1 year old. She loves liberation, the ocean, and a fine chicken dinner. Offering and Giving First The Giving First program donates 50% of the non-pledge offering each month to a charitable organization that we feel is consistent with Unitarian Universalist principles. The program began in November 2009, and First Parish has donated over $200,000 to more than 70 organizations. For February 2026, Boston Healthcare for the Homeless will share half the offering collected during Sunday worship at First Parish. The mission of the Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program is to provide or assure access to the highest quality health care for all individuals and families experiencing homelessness in our community. BHCHP is an integrated team of over 600 medical and behavioral health staff, social service providers, and support staff committed to providing comprehensive, high-quality health care for individuals and families experiencing homelessness in Boston and beyond. Learn more at their website: https://www.bhchp.org/. The remaining half of your offering supports the life and work of this Parish. To donate using your smartphone, you may text "fpuu" to 73256. Then follow the directions in the texts you receive.

Host Dr. Davide Soldato and guests Dr. David Einstein and Dr. Ravi Madan discuss JCO article, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations," underscoring the need for a consensus on clinical trial designs implementing novel endpoints in this population, the importance of PSA doubling time as a prognostic factor and with an emphasis on treatment de-escalation to limit toxicity and improve patient outcomes. TRANSCRIPT The disclosures for guests on this podcast can be found in the show notes. Davide Soldato: Hello and welcome to JCO After Hours, the podcast where we sit down with authors from some of the latest articles published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. I am your host, Dr. Davide Soldato, medical oncologist at Ospedale San Martino in Genoa, Italy. Today, we are joined by JCO authors Dr. David Einstein and Dr. Ravi Madan. Dr. Einstein is a medical oncologist specializing in genitourinary malignancy working at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, part of the DFCI Cancer Center, and an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Madan is a senior clinician at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), where he focuses on conducting clinical research in prostate cancer, particularly in the field of immunotherapy. Today, we will be discussing the article titled, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations." So, thank you for speaking with us, Dr. Einstein and Dr. Madan. David Einstein: Thanks for having us. This is a great pleasure. Ravi Madan: Appreciate being here. Davide Soldato: So, I just want to start from a very wide angle. And the main question is why did you feel that there was the need to convey a consensus and a working group to talk about this specific topic: biochemically recurrent prostate cancer? What has been the change in current clinical practice and in the trial design that we are seeing nowadays? And so, why was it necessary to convey such a consensus and provide considerations on novel clinical trials? David Einstein: Yeah, so I think it's very interesting, this disease state of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. It's very different from other disease states in prostate cancer, and we felt that there was a real need to define those differences in clinical trials. Years ago, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was the primary disease state that was explored, and over time, a lot of things shifted earlier to metastatic disease defined on a CAT scan and bone scan to an earlier disease state of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. And the clinical trial principles from late-stage could be applied to MCSPC as well. However, BCR is very different because the patients are very different. And for those reasons, there are unique considerations, especially in terms of toxicity and treatment intensity, that should be applied to biochemically recurrent prostate cancer as opposed to just using the principles that are used in other disease states. And for that reason, we thought it was very important to delineate some of these considerations in this paper with a group of experts. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. So, one of the main changes that have been applied in recent years in clinical practice when looking at biochemically recurrent prostate cancer is the use of molecular imaging and particularly of PSMA PET. So, first of all, just a quick question: was the topic of the consensus related on which threshold of PSA to use to order a PET scan to evaluate this kind of patient? David Einstein: Yeah, thanks for that question. It's a super important one. The brief answer is that no, we did not address questions about exactly when clinicians would decide to order scans. We were more concerned with the results of those scans in how you define different disease states. But I think as a broader question, I think a lot of folks feel that finding things on a scan equates that with what we used to find on conventional scans. And fundamentally, we actually sought to redefine that disease space as something that's not equivalent to metastatic disease, and rather coined the term "PSMA-positive BCR" to indicate that traditional BCR prognostic criteria and factors still apply, and that these patients have a distinct natural history from those with more advanced metastatic disease. Ravi Madan: And if I may just add that the National Cancer Institute is running a trial where we're prospectively monitoring PSMA-positive BCR patients. And that data is clearly showing that, much like what we knew about BCR a decade ago, PSMA findings in BCR patients do not change the fact that overall, BCR is an indolent disease state. And the findings, which are usually comprised of five- to seven-millimeter lymph nodes, do not endanger patients or require immediate therapy. And so, while PSMA is a tool that we can be using in this disease state, it doesn't really change the principal approach to how we should manage these patients. And as Dr. Einstein alluded to, there is a drive to create a false equivalency between PSMA-positive BCR and metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, but that is not supported by the data we're accumulating or any of the clinical data as it exists. Davide Soldato: One thing that it's very important and you mentioned in your answer to my question was actually the role of PET scan and conventional imaging, so CAT scan and bone scan that we have used for years to stage patients with metastatic prostate cancer. And you mentioned that there is a distinction among patients who have a positive PET scan and a BCR, and patients who have a positive conventional imaging. And yet, we know that sometimes the findings of the PET scan are not always so clear to interpret. So, I just wanted to understand if the consensus reached an agreement as to when to use conventional imaging to potentially resolve some findings that we have on PET scan among thess patients with BCR? David Einstein: Yeah, I think there's a number of questions actually buried within that question. One of which is: does PSMA PET result in false positives? And the answer has definitely been yes. There's a known issue with false-positive rib lesions. And so, first and foremost, we need to be very careful in calling what truly is suspicious disease and what might actually not be cancer or might be something that is totally separate. So I think that's the first part of the answer to that question. The second is to what extent do we need to use paired PET and conventional imaging to define this disease state? In other words, do you have to have positive findings on one and negative findings on the other in order to enter this definition? The challenge there, as we discussed, is that logistically, oftentimes it's hard to get patients to do multiple sets of scans to actually create that definition. Sometimes it's difficult to get insurers to pay for such scans. And finally, it's hard to sometimes blind radiologists to the results of one scan in reading the other. So, we did have some deliberations about to what extent you could use some of the CAT scan portion of a PSMA PET in order to at least partially define that. We also talked about using bone scans to confirm any bone findings seen on PET. But I think another important part of this is not just the baseline imaging, but also what's going to be done serially on a study in order to define responses and progression. And that's sort of a whole separate conversation about to what extent you can interpret changes in serial PET. Ravi Madan: And just to pick up on the key factor here, I think that the PSMA PET in BCR is pretty good at defining lymph node disease, and that's actually predominantly 80 to 90 percent of the disease seen on these findings. It might be pretty good at also defining other soft tissue findings. The real issues come to bone findings. And one thing the group did not feel was appropriate was to just define only PSMA-positive bone findings confirmed on a CT bone window. There's not really great data on that, but the working group felt that, when in the rare situation, because it is relatively rare, a PSMA-positive finding is in a bone, a bone scan should be done. And it's worth noting that Phu Tran, who is a co-author and a co-leader of this working group, his group has already defined that underlying genomics of conventionally based lesions, such as bone scan, are more aggressive than findings on next-gen imaging, such as PSMA. So, there is also a genomic underlying rationale for defining the difference between what is seen on a PET scan in a bone and what is seen on a bone scan. Davide Soldato: Coming back to this issue of PET PSMA sometimes identifying very small lesions where we don't see any kind of correlates on conventional imaging or where we see only very little alteration on the bone scan or in the CT scan, was there any role that was imagined, for example, for MRI to distinguish this type of findings on the PET scan? Ravi Madan: So, I think that, again, what can be identified on a PSMA frequently cannot be seen on conventional imaging. We didn't feel that it was a requirement to get an MRI or a CT to necessarily confirm the PSMA findings. I think that generally, we have to realize that in this disease state, that questionable lesions are going to be seen on any imaging, including PSMA. We've actually probably put way too much faith in PSMA findings thus far, as Dr. Einstein alluded to with some of the false positives we're seeing. So, I think that these false positives are going to have to be baked into trials. And in terms of clinical practice, it highlights the need to again, not overreact to everything we see and not necessarily need to biopsy everything and put patients' health in jeopardy to delineate a disease that's indolent anyway. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. That was very clear. So, basically, the main driver was really also the data showing that if we have a BCR, so a patient with a biochemically recurrent disease that is positive on the conventional imaging, this is usually associated with a different aggressiveness of the disease. But coming back to a comment that you made before, Dr. Madan, you said that even if we talk about PSMA-positive BCR, we are still talking about BCR and the same criteria should apply. So, what we have used for years in this space to actually try to stratify the prognosis of patients is the PSA doubling time, so how quickly the PSA rises over time. So, coming back to that comment, was the consensus on the PSA doubling time basically retained as what we were using before, so defining patients with a doubling time less than 12 months, 10 months, 9 months, as patients with a higher risk of progressing in terms of developing metastatic disease? Ravi Madan: Yes, so that's a very important point. And the working group defined high-risk BCR as a PSA doubling time less than six months. And this really comes from Johns Hopkins historical data, which shows that if your doubling time is three months or less, there's about a 67 percent chance of metastasis at five years. If it's between three and six months, it's 50 percent. And if it's over six months, if it's between six and nine months, it's roughly only 27 percent. There are trials that are accruing with eligibility criteria that they may describe as high-risk that are beyond six months, but the data as really it's been defined in the literature highlights that truly high-risk BCR is less than six months. And the working group had a consensus on that opinion, and that was our recommendation. David Einstein: And I think an important follow-on to that is that's regardless of PET findings, right? And so, we present a couple of case studies of patients with positive PET findings who have a long doubling time, in whom the disease is in fact indolent, as you would have expected from a traditional BCR prognostic standpoint. Obviously, there are patients in whom they have fast doubling times, and even if they do not have PET findings, that doesn't make them not high-risk. Ravi Madan: And just to follow up that point, I will let you know a little bit of a free preview that my colleague Melissa Abel from the NCI will be presenting PSMA findings in the context of PSA doubling time at ASCO GU if that data is accepted. Davide Soldato: Looking forward for those data because I think that they're going to clarify a lot of the findings that we have in this specific population. And coming back to one of the points that we made before, so PET PSMA has a very high ability to discriminate also a very low burden of disease, which we currently refer to as oligometastatic biochemically recurrent prostate cancer, which is not entirely defined as an entity. But what we are seeing both in some clinical trials, which use mainly conventional imaging, but also what we're starting to see in clinical practice, is that frequently we use the metastasis-directed therapy to treat these patients. So, just a little bit of a comment on the use of this type of strategy in clinical practice and if the panel thought of including this as, for example, a stratification criteria or mandated in the design of novel clinical trials in the field of BCR? David Einstein: Yeah, I think that's an incredibly important point. You know, fundamentally, there's a lot of heterogeneity in practice where some folks are using local salvage approaches, some are using systemic therapies, in some cases surveillance may be reasonable, or some combination of these different strategies. We certainly have phase two data from multiple trials suggesting that met-directed therapy may help buy patients time off of treatment until subsequent treatments are started. And that in and of itself may be an important goal that we can come back to in discussing novel endpoints. I think what our panel acknowledged was that, in some sense, the clinical practice has gotten even farther ahead than where the data are, and this is being offered pretty routinely to patients in practice. And so, what became clear was that we, in developing clinical trials, cannot forbid investigators from doing something that would be within their usual standard of care, even if it might not be supported by the most robust data. But at minimum, it definitely should be used as a stratification factor, or in some trial designs, you can do met-directed therapy after a primary endpoint is assessed. And that offers a compromise between testing, say, the effect of a systemic therapy but also not excluding patients and investigators from doing what they would have done had they not been on a study. Ravi Madan: And I would just like to follow up your phrasing in the question of "oligometastatic prostate cancer." We have a figure in the paper and it highlights the fact that, unfortunately, that term in prostate cancer is imaging agnostic. And we've already discussed in this podcast, as well as in the paper, that imaging used to define a metastatic lesion, whether it's PSMA or conventional imaging, carries with it a different clinical weight and a different prognosis. So, we feel in the working group, that the correct term for this disease state of PSMA-positive BCR is just that: PSMA-positive BCR. We also have to realize that when we talk about oligometastatic disease, while it's imaging agnostic, it seems to be numerically based, whether it's five or three or 10 depending on the trial. But PSMA-positive BCR does not have a limit in terms of the number of lesions. And so again, we just feel that there is an important need to delineate what we're seeing in this disease state, which again is PSMA-positive BCR, and that should be differentiated frankly from oligometastatic disease defined on other imaging platforms. David Einstein: Right, and that also makes clear that patients can have polyfocal disease on PET that still is not what we would consider metastatic, but goes beyond the traditional definition of oligometastatic. So, in other words, just because someone has PET-detected disease only, that does not automatically equate with oligometastatic. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. So, you were speaking a little bit, Dr. Einstein, about the different types of treatment that we can propose or not propose to this patient because you mentioned, for example, that in clinical practice MDT, so metastasis-directed therapy, is becoming more and more used. For these patients, we can potentially use systemic treatments, which include androgen deprivation therapy, which can be given continuously or in an intermittent fashion. And recently, we can also use novel systemic therapies, for example, enzalutamide, to treat this type of patient. So, given that the point of the consensus was really to provide consideration for novel clinical trials in this space, what was the opinion on the panel regarding the control arm? So, if we're looking at a novel therapy in the BCR space, does the control arm need to include a therapy or not? And if so, which therapy? David Einstein: Yeah, this is a super important question and one that's subject to a lot of discussion, especially in light of recent data from EMBARK. What we came to a consensus around was the fact that neither MDT nor systemic therapy should be required as a control arm on BCR trials. And we can talk about a number of reasons for that. There's also the pragmatics of what investigators might actually accrue patients to and what they would consider their standard of care, and that's important to factor in, too. I think that one of the major goals of our working group was outlining what kinds of trials we would like to see in the future and where the limitations of the current data stand. For example, EMBARK proposes a strategy of a single treatment discontinuation and resumption at a predefined threshold indefinitely. That's probably not how most people are practicing. Most folks are probably using some version of intermittent therapy as they would have before this trial, but we actually don't have any data supporting that. Moreover, we don't have data comparing different intermittent strategies to one another. We don't know what the right thresholds are, we don't know how much time we buy patients off treatment, and we don't know to what extent MDT modifies that. And so, those are all really important questions to be asking in future versions of these trials. I'd say my second point would be that a lot of drug development is happening with novel therapies that are not hormonal, trying to bring them into this space. And when you think about trying to compare one of those types of therapies to a hormonal therapy on short-term endpoints, the hormonal therapy is always going to win. Hormonal therapy is almost universally effective, it will bring down PSAs, and it will prolong, quote-unquote, "progression." The downside of that is that hormonal therapy doesn't actually modify the disease, it suppresses it, and it tends to have fairly transient effects once you remove it. And so, part of our goal was in trying to figure out some novel endpoints that would allow these novel types of therapies to be examined head-to-head against a more traditional type of hormonal therapy and have some measurement of some of the more long-term impacts. Davide Soldato: So, jumping right into the endpoints, because this is a very relevant and I think very well-constructed part of the paper that you published. Because in the past we have used some of these endpoints, for example, metastasis-free survival, as potentially a proxy for long-term outcomes. But is this the right endpoint to be using right now, especially considering that frequently this outcome is measured using conventional imaging, but we are including in these trials patients who are actually negative on conventional imaging but have a positive PSMA when they enter this type of trial? David Einstein: Yeah, there's a number of challenges with those types of endpoints. One of which is, as you say, we're changing the goalposts a little bit on how we're calling progression. We still don't exactly understand what progression on PET means, and so that's something that is challenging. That said, we're also cognizant of the fact that many times investigators are likely to get PET scans in the setting of rising PSA, and that's going to affect any endpoint that relies purely on conventional imaging. So, there's some tension there between these two different sets of goalposts. One thing that we emphasize is that not only are there some challenges in defining those, but also there're challenges in what matters to a patient. So, if a progression event occurs in the form of a single lesion on a PET scan or even a conventional image, that might be relevant for a clinical trial but might be less relevant for a patient. In other words, that's something that, in the real world, an investigator might use serial rounds of metastasis-directed therapy or intermittent therapy to treat in a way that doesn't have any clinical consequences for the patient necessarily. In other words, they're asymptomatic, it's not the equivalent of a metastatic castration-resistant disease progressing. And so, we also need to be cognizant of the fact that if we choose a single endpoint like PFS, that there's going to be many different versions of progression, some of which probably matter clinically more than others, and some of which are more salvageable by local therapies than others. Ravi Madan: So I think the working group really thoughtfully looked at the different options and underscored perhaps strengths and weaknesses, and I think that's presented as you mentioned in the paper. But I think it's also going to depend on the modality, the approach of the therapeutic intervention. In some cases if it's hormone-based, then maybe PSA is providing some early metrics, maybe metastasis-free survival is more relevant in a continuous therapy, but intermittent therapies might have a different approach. There's emerging immunotherapy strategies, radiopharmaceutical strategies, they might have some more novel strategies as well. I think we have to be open-minded here, but we also have to be very clear: we do not know what progression is on a PSMA scan. Just new lesions may not carry the clinical significance that we think, and we may not know what threshold that ultimately becomes clinically relevant is. So, I do think that there was some caution issued by the working group about using PSMA as an endpoint because we still do not have the data to understand what that modality is telling us. Again, I'm optimistic that the National Cancer Institute's prospective data set that we've been collecting, which has over 130 patients now, will provide some insights in the months and years ahead. Davide Soldato: So, just to ask the question very abruptly, what would you feel like the best endpoint for this type of trials is? I understand that is a little bit related to the type of treatments that we're going to use, whether it's intermittent, whether it's continuous, but do we have something that can encapsulate all of the discussion that we have up until this point? David Einstein: Yeah, so that's a perfect segue to the idea of novel endpoints, which we feel are very important to develop in these novel disease spaces. So, one thing that we discussed was an endpoint called treatment-free survival, which conceptually you can think of as exactly what it sounds like, but statistically you actually have to do some work to get there. And so essentially, you imagine a series of Kaplan-Meier curves overlaid: one about overall survival, one time to next therapy, one time on initial therapy. You can actually then take the area under those curves or between those curves and essentially sum it up using restricted mean survival time analysis. And that can give you a guide about the longitudinal experience of a patient: time spent on treatment versus off treatment; time spent with toxicity versus without toxicity. And importantly, each one of those time-to-event metrics can be adjusted depending on exactly what the protocol is and what is allowed or not allowed and what's prespecified as far as initiation of subsequent therapies. So, we felt that this was a really important endpoint to develop in this disease space because it can really capture that longitudinal aspect. It can really reward treatments that are effective in getting durable responses and getting patients off of therapy, because unfortunately, PFS-based endpoints generally reward more or longer systemic therapy versus shorter or no systemic therapy, and that's sort of an artificial bias in the way those endpoints are constructed. So, I think that there are challenges of course in implementing any new endpoint, and some of the things that are really critical are collecting data about toxicity and about subsequent therapies beyond what a typical trial might collect. But I think in this kind of disease space, that longitudinal aspect is critical because these are really patients who are going to be going through multiple rounds of therapy, going to be going on and off treatments, they're going to be using combinations of local and systemic therapies. And so, any one single endpoint is going to be limited, but I think that really highlights the limitations of using PFS-based endpoints in this space. Ravi Madan: I also think that in the concept of treatment-free survival lies one of the more powerful and, honestly, I was surprised by this, that it was so universally accepted, recommendations from the committee. And that was that the general approach to trials in this space should be a de-escalation of the EMBARK strategy as it's laid out with relatively continuous therapy with one pause. And so, I think again, buried in all of this highlights the need for novel endpoints like treatment-free survival. We get to the fact that these are patients who are not at near-term clinical risk from symptoms of their disease, so de-escalating therapies does not put them at risk. And if you look at, for example, lower-volume metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, it's become realized that we need to de-escalate, and there are now trials being done to look at that. Historically, we know that BCR is an indolent disease process for the vast majority of patients who are not at near-term risk from clinical deterioration. So, therefore, we shouldn't wait a decade into abundant BCR trials to de-escalate. The de-escalation strategy should be from the outset. And that was something the committee really actually universally agreed on. David Einstein: And that de-escalation can really take multiple forms. That could be different strategies for intermittent therapy, different start-stop strategies. It could also mean actually intensifying in the short-term with the goal long-term de-intensification, kind of analogous to kidney cancer where we might use dual checkpoint inhibitors up front with some higher upfront toxicity but with the hope of actually long-term benefit and actually being able to come off treatment and stay in remission. Those kinds of trade-offs are the types of things that are challenging to talk about. There's not a one-size-fits-all answer for every patient. And so, that's why some of these endpoints like treatment-free survival would be really helpful in actually quantifying those trade-offs and allowing each patient to make decisions that are concordant with their own wishes. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. That was very clear, especially on the part of de-escalation, because, as you were mentioning, I think that we are globally talking about a situation, a clinical situation, where the prognosis can be very good and patients can stay off treatment for a very long period of time without compromising long-term outcomes. And I think that well-constructed de-escalation trials, as you were mentioning and as the consensus endorsed, are really needed in this space also to limit toxicity. This brings us to the end of this episode. So, I would like to thank again Dr. Einstein and Dr. Madan for joining us today. David Einstein: We really appreciate the time and the thought, and I think that even starting these types of discussions is critical. Even just recognizing that this is a unique space is the beginning of the conversation. Ravi Madan: Yeah, and I want to thank JCO for giving us this forum and the opportunity to publish these results and all the expert prostate cancer investigators who were part of this committee. We produced some good thoughts for the future. Davide Soldato: We appreciate you sharing more on your JCO article titled, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations." If you enjoy our show, please leave us a rating and review and be sure to come back for another episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinion of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  

In this episode of The Talking Gut Podcast, Dr Jim Kantidakis sits down with Professor Ted J. Kaptchuk, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Director of the Program in Placebo Studies and the Therapeutic Encounter at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Professor Kaptchuk is one of the world's leading researchers in placebo science. His groundbreaking 2010 study, Placebos Without Deception: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Irritable Bowel Syndrome, demonstrated that patients with IBS improved even when they knowingly took a placebo — challenging long-held assumptions about mind–body interactions and symptom perception. In this conversation, we explore: What the placebo effect really is — and what it isn't Why IBS and other gut–brain disorders show high placebo response rates How open-label placebo works without deception The neurobiology of expectation, ritual, and healing What the "therapeutic encounter" means for modern clinical practice This episode invites clinicians and patients alike to rethink symptoms, perception, and the powerful role of context in healing.

Matthew 5:1-12When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying:“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. I like to be right. Just ask Katelyn. Or better yet, ask Pastor Mark when he points out a grammatical error in my writing. Yes—the Oxford comma should be there.What's worse than liking to be right is having a toddler who also likes to be right. I hold up an orange and he declares it an apple. I say it's too cold to go to the park and he responds, “No it's not—it's perfect!” You get the picture.I imagine I'm not alone in this. We all like to be right. And our certainty—our confidence that we are right—can be far more dangerous than we realize.In 2008, a woman went to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, a Harvard teaching hospital, one of the best in the world. She's taken back to the OR, put under, and the surgeon completes the surgery successfully. Everything went great…Until she woke up in recovery and realized the wrong side of her body had been stitched up. The surgeon had operated on her left leg instead of her right.When the hospital later explained how this happened, Kenneth Sands, a vice president, said this: “The surgeon began prepping without looking for the mark and, for whatever reason, he believed he was on the correct side.”We've all felt utterly right about something, only to discover later that the opposite was true. And more than we like being right, we hate realizing we're wrong. Now, an important clarification - Being wrong and realizing you're wrong are not the same thing. Kathryn Schulz uses an image from Looney Tunes to explain this. Wile E. Coyote chases the Road Runner straight off a cliff. He keeps running, completely confident, even though there's nothing beneath him. It's only when he looks down that he realizes he's in trouble.That's the difference. Being wrong is standing over thin air and thinking you're on solid ground. Realizing you're wrong is looking down and seeing there's nothing holding you up.This morning, I want to linger with just two of the Beatitudes. Not because the others don't matter—but because these two speak directly to the world we're living in right now. Our longing to be right, and our deep resistance to admitting we're wrong, sit at the heart of so much division: in our homes, our communities, our churches, our nation, and even within ourselves.And into that reality, Jesus speaks a word of blessing—a word that turns our fear, our hatred of being wrong into good news.Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. We know what it means to be hungry and thirsty. Those longings are part of being human. We hunger not only for food, but for connection, purpose, community, beauty, and joy.But to hunger for righteousness? That's not a phrase we use or even hear outside of this space. In fact, it's a word many of us avoid. It can sound pious, self-righteous, or just plain uncomfortable.And that's unfortunate… Because our discomfort with the word comes from confusion about what it means. Righteousness simply means being made right: made right with God, made right with others, and made right with yourself. Blessed, then, are those who long to be made right.Like the other Beatitudes, this one surprises us. Standing there on the mountainside, we might expect Jesus to say, Blessed are the righteous. Blessed are the ones who get it right. Blessed are the ones who already are right.But that's not how it goes. When people come to Jesus assuming they are righteous, he has a way of setting the record straight. It is those who come knowing they are wrong—those who long to be made right—who receive grace and mercy.The truth of the matter is this: we cannot make ourselves right with God, no matter how hard we try.All the praying, Bible reading, worshiping, serving, and learning in the world do not make us righteous before God. Rather, the Holy Spirit works through these practices to make us aware of the grace of Jesus. And that grace alone is what makes us right. Not our words nor our posts on Facebook. Not our deeds. Not our politics. Grace alone.Which is why Jesus finishes the Beatitude in the passive voice: for they will be filled.Those who recognize they are wrong, those who don't always get it right, those who long to be made right rather than clinging to the certainty that they already are - they will be filled. They will be made right with God, with others, and themselves.This is a blessing for those of us who get it wrong—who mess up, who don't always get it right.So much of what we see and hear around us—in our culture, in business, certainly in politics—tells us to do the opposite: never admit fault, double down, point fingers, claim victory at all costs, and insist that we are always right. But there is no hunger or thirst to be made right if we never admit that we're wrong. This blessing is for those who screw up - and can say so.What if this was our posture in the present moment, instead of the certainty that we are right?What if we moved through the world not with the desire to be right, but with the desire to be made right—not only with God, but with one another? What if we faced our spouses, our kids, our neighbors with the simple possibility that maybe… I'm wrong on this.Believe me, I'm preaching to myself here. How much better would your marriage be? Your relationship with your kids? How many friendships might be healed if we could say, “I was wrong. I'm sorry. I want this to be made right.”To error is to be human. So be human, admit you're human, and be blessed.And the best news comes with the Beatitude that follows: Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy.Jesus meets our wrongness—our sin, our failure, our getting it wrong—not with contempt, not with an I told you so, but with kindness. With mercy. In this life, we expect being wrong to be met with punishment. But Jesus shows us another way. Instead of meeting our sin with punishment, he meets it with sacrifice, generosity, and mercy.And it is only because we have received mercy that we can extend mercy to others. We cannot give what we have not first received.So when someone comes longing to be made right—admitting they were wrong—it does no good to meet that honesty with harsh contempt or punishment. We resist this because we're afraid. Afraid mercy will be taken advantage of. Afraid kindness will be trampled on.And yet, what does the Lord require of us but to love kindness.We don't need to hate being wrong. Because when we admit we're wrong, we are not earning grace—we are simply telling the truth. And grace is already there to meet us.This week: look for one moment—just one—where you can say the words, “I was wrong. I'm sorry. I want this to be made right.” Say it to your spouse, your child, your neighbor, your pastors, or to God.Don't refute. Don't double down. Don't defend yourself. Instead, hunger and thirst to be made right.And then be surprised by the grace of Jesus that meets you there, fills you up, and says, I forgive you.In a world where leaders and institutions seem incapable of doing such a thing, this may be one of the strongest witnesses Christians can do in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, who gives us mercy, makes us right, and blesses us: not in spite of our mistakes, but because of them.Amen.

  We continue our campaign to #EndNeurophobia, with the help of Dr. Aaron Berkowitz. This time, Andrew presents a case of bilateral leg weakness to Sarah and Valeria. Neurology DDx Schema Andrew Sanchez @ASanchez_PS  Andrew is a rising hospitalist-educator at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Meeting inpatients and working with them to achieve diagnostic clarity is… Read More »Episode 438: Neurology VMR – Bilateral Leg Weakness

Show Notes S4E1 Burnout isn't just a buzzword — it's a lived experience for many clinicians working in hospital settings. In the Season 4 premiere of Acute Conversations, co-hosts Dr. Leo Arguelles and Dr. Danny Young are joined by Kelly Murphy, PT, DPT; Maria Tucker, PT, DPT; and Laura Cataldo, MOT, OT to unpack what burnout really looks like in acute care — and what can actually be done about it. Drawing from their published work in the Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy and their experience leading a departmental burnout initiative at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, the guests break down how burnout is defined, how it can be measured, and why it so often goes unrecognized until clinicians are already depleted. They explore the core components of burnout — emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment — and why acute care environments uniquely intensify each one. The conversation goes beyond awareness to action, highlighting both individual strategies and system-level interventions that can help clinicians reconnect with purpose while still navigating high-acuity, high-demand settings. From grounding techniques that work mid-shift to organizational changes that foster transparency, recognition, and trust, this episode offers a practical and hopeful framework for clinicians who want to keep showing up — without losing themselves in the process. Today's Guests: Kelly Murphy PT, DPT kamurphy0615@gmail.com Maria Tucker PT, DPT mtucker4@bidmc.harvard.edu Laura Cataldo MOT, OT lecataldoqu@gmail.com Guest Quotes: 11:14 Laura “ …in our research, it, burnout is not something that can be fixed by doing individual interventions alone. And in a setting such as a hospital, or other large organizations, you really have to focus on organizational changes as well to have an effect on burnout.” 26:21 Maria “… another like self-reflection piece is like, yeah, we’re burnt out, but also our managers and leadership and everybody, like they’re burnt out as well. … but realizing and saying, they can be burnt out and they are burnt out and we’re just experiencing a different area of burnout or a reason for burnout. But at the end of the day, we all have the same like kind of feelings.” 32:05 Kelly “ I think it just brought general awareness to how good it feels to remind our staff. Shout each other out or thank someone for their help thing. And then, gosh, I still, to this day, every day on my commute home on the train there’s one intervention that we talk about in here. Three good things. I still do that every day on the way home because I’m like, you know what? Even if this was the worst day ever and my patients. Really had a hard day all day. I can still choose three good things, even if it’s not patient care related.” Rapid Responses:  What’s your best stress relief activity on the weekends when you’re not working?  Ski and golf. Oh, we’re all answering…I like going for a walk with my dog. You know you work in acute care when… Laura “When your knee deep in bodily fluids” Maria “ When you have determined both your worst and best outcome for every single patient before you enter the room.” Kelly “ When you come down to lunch and different scrubs and you start out the day in… Or if you’re throwing away your sneakers, like it’s beyond just a bleach wipe.” Links: https://journals.lww.com/jacpt/abstract/2025/04000/assessing_and_managing_prevalence_of_burnout_in.1.aspx

Welcome to Pulse Summer 2026, where Louise and George revisit the Pulse Pod archives to bring you a curated set of interviews which will challenge and inspire.Louise & George talk with Liz Salmi, Communications & Patient Initiatives Director for OpenNotes at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in the US about her research and patient advocacy work, and what happens when patients get bad health news from reading it in online firstPaper: When Bad News Comes Through the PortalKeynote: Getting Ready for Open Everything, MedInfo 2023Follow @TheLizArmy on LinkedIn | BlueSkyVisit Pulse+IT.news to subscribe to breaking digital news, weekly newsletters and a rich treasure trove of archival material. People in the know, get their news from Pulse+IT – Your leading voice in digital health news.Follow us on LinkedIn Louise | George | Pulse+ITFollow us on BlueSky Louise | George | Pulse+ITSend us your questions pulsepod@pulseit.newsProduction by Octopod Productions | Ivan Juric

Living with IBS-C isn't just about managing physical symptoms, it's also about navigating the fear, worry, and emotional toll that often come with the condition. In this powerful episode, host Jacqueline Gaulin is joined by Dr. Sarah Ballou, clinical psychologist and Director of the GI Psychology Service at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, to explore how fear shows up along the IBS-C journey and what you can do to face it with confidence and support.   In this episode, you'll learn: The most common fears IBS-C patients experience and how they influence daily life and treatment decisions Why fear can sometimes hold you back from finding relief Practical tools to help you feel more in control, confident, and hopeful How to talk openly with your provider about the fears that affect your care Whether you're newly diagnosed or feeling stuck after years of symptoms, this episode offers real-world guidance, emotional validation, and a reminder that you're not alone on this journey.   This episode is sponsored by Ardelyx.  

I was out drinking martinis with Cora Opsahl, director of 32BJ Health Fund, and Cora said, "Look, most plan sponsors' biggest expense is health system spend, hospital spend." I know this is an unexpected start to an episode about pharmaceutical pricing and value featuring Sarah Emond, CEO of ICER (Institute for Clinical and Economic Review). But yeah, 50% of most plan sponsors' spend these days goes to health systems. Fifty percent! One half! For a full transcript of this episode, click here. If you enjoy this podcast, be sure to subscribe to the free weekly newsletter to be a member of the Relentless Tribe. So, if a patient who is adherent to a drug and that drug keeps that patient out of the hospital, why do I want to make a patient have excessive skin in the game to get that drug, which everybody knows at this point this "skin in the game" can cause said patient to not be adherent in many cases, cost being a very big reason patients give for not taking medications as prescribed. So then we have this not adherent patient who winds up in the hospital, via the ER often enough. The core issue here that surfaced, bottom line—and I'm not sure if this was in spite of the martinis or as a result of them—but while hospital spend is the largest health expense, high-value drugs that prevent hospitalization often face patient cost sharing and access restrictions, which leads to poor patient adherence and ultimately higher system cost potentially. So then Cora and I spent the next half hour debating when the statement is empirically true and when it's not. And you know what it all boils down to? What's the value of the drug? Do we even know what that means to start? But if it's determined that the drug is relatively high value, then the plan desperately should want to do everything possible to keep that patient on that medication, and cost sharing is a huge barrier to adherence. Today, as I said, I'm speaking with Sarah Emond, CEO over at ICER, and we get into all of this in the conversation that follows. In fact, most of the conversation that follows explores the tensions that exist in the current way that we sell and buy pharmaceutical products. I'm just gonna sum up these tensions in a list here at the top of this show. There's six of them that Sarah Emond and I discussed today by my counting, and each of these we explore in some depth. So, here's the list. Tension 1: The value of any given drug (in other words, what is the fair price for that drug considering the health gains that it delivers) versus the total cost to the plan for the total population taking that drug. GLP-1s have entered the chat. GLP-1s (by ICER's analysis, at least) are super high-value drugs that also can bankrupt plans due to the number of folks who may benefit from taking the drug. Definitely a tense tension to kick off our list here. Tension 2: The list or net price of a drug versus patient access and affordability. Again, this can be tense in an area of much misalignment. You can have a great well-priced drug with huge patient affordability and access challenges because drug net price and coinsurance amounts often have nothing to do with each other. Tension 3: Lifetime value of a drug versus a 3-, 2.5-year, whatever time horizon that many plan sponsor actuaries use in their value assessment. We discussed this today, but there's a Summer Short (SUMS7) on actuarial value horizons with Keith Passwater and JR Clark if you wanna dig in on this further. Tension 4: The tension between the societal value of a drug or even the patient's perceived value of a drug versus what an employer plan sponsor might perceive as the value. What is the formula used to determine value? What's in and what's out? So, that's a bigger conversation just beyond the time horizon for what's included in this calculation. Tension 5: Exacerbating the what's included in the value contemplation beyond just what you include in there is the tension between what is hypothetically of value and what is possible to measure. If you have pharma datasets and medical datasets separate in silos, who knows how many hospital readmissions were prevented by whatever drug? And how much presenteeism or absenteeism exists. I mean, it is an outlier, again, if anyone even knows the net price they paid for a drug, just to level set context here. Tension 6: Lowering financial barriers for patients to take drugs that are of value versus status quo goals and incentives. Like, for example, PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers) are often told that their goal is to reduce drug spend. Okay … so, how do I do that? Oh, reduce access either by prior auths or delay tactics or really high coinsurance, which is gonna reduce adherence by design. And it's someone else's problem—if I'm just thinking like a status quo PBM—if medical spend goes up, right? So, that's our last and not insignificant tension. And look, who comes out the loser in all of these tensions when they get tense? Patients. Not pricing based on value and not buying and setting up cost sharing based on value punishes patients and also plan sponsors or any other ultimate purchaser in the long term, given that the plan is but a population of patients if you start thinking about it in that context. Here is Sarah's advice in a nutshell: Pharma, sell. Pick your price based on something other than market power. And some pharma companies are actually dipping their toe into these waters and doing it. But then PBMs and plan sponsors have to hold up their end of the bargain here and buy drugs based on their value, not just the size of their rebates or some other discounting promise. And then we gotta continue the through line through to member affordability and access. High-value drugs should get preferred. So, right, do a high-value formulary. Listen to the show with Nina Lathia, RPh, MSc, PhD (EP426) on high-value formularies and then listen (after you're done with that one) to episode 435 with Dan Mendelson entitled "Optimized Pharmacy Benefits Are Required if You Want to Do or Buy Value-Based Care." Also, as I said, GLP-1s come up in this conversation, so … yeah, buckle up. One last thing, besides my normal thank you to Aventria Health Group for sponsoring this episode, I am so pleased to thank Payerset for donating to help Relentless Health Value stay on the air. Payerset is a price transparency company with a mission to create fair and equitable healthcare for everyone. Love that. Payerset empowers healthcare organizations, employers, and patients with the most complete set of healthcare price transparency data. They benchmark every negotiated rate and claim and delivering the actionable insights needed for smarter contract negotiations and a more transparent healthcare system. As I have said several times today, my conversation is with Sarah Emond, CEO of ICER. Also mentioned in this episode are Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER); Cora Opsahl; 32 BJ Health Fund; Keith Passwater; JR Clark; Nina Lathia, RPh, MSc, PhD; Dan Mendelson; Aventria Health Group; Payerset; Antonio Ciaccia; Elizabeth Mitchell; Purchaser Business Group on Health (PBGH); Shane Cerone; Sam Flanders, MD; Mark Cuban; Morgan Health; and Tom Nash. For a list of healthcare industry acronyms and terms that may be unfamiliar to you, click here. You can learn more at ICER.org and follow Sarah on LinkedIn.   Sarah K. Emond, MPP, is president and chief executive officer of the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), a leading nonprofit health policy research organization, with 25 years of experience in the business and policy of healthcare. She joined ICER in 2009 as its first chief operating officer and third employee and has worked to grow the organization's approach, scope, and impact over the years. Prior to joining ICER, Sarah spent time as a communications consultant, with six years in the corporate communications and investor relations department at a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company and several years with a healthcare communications firm. Sarah began her healthcare career in clinical research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. A graduate of the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University, Sarah holds a Master of Public Policy degree with a concentration in health policy. Sarah also received a bachelor's degree in biological sciences from Smith College. Sarah speaks frequently at national conferences on the topics of prescription drug pricing policy, comparative effectiveness research, and value-based healthcare.   08:18 Why list prices are a lie. 10:59 How does the rebate model sometimes get in the way of paying for value? 12:50 Bonus clip with Sarah Emond. 13:14 EP491 with Elizabeth Mitchell. 13:20 EP490 and EP492 with Shane Cerone and Sam Flanders, MD. 14:37 The tension that is created between affordability and adherence. 15:03 When cost sharing makes sense in pharmaceutical drug pricing. 17:26 INBW42 with Stacey on moral hazard. 18:53 How GLP-1s are "wildly cost effective." 21:32 Why the sticker shock on cost-effective drugs is a failure in the system for paying for value. 22:38 ICER's report on GLP-1s. 26:59 EP385 with Dan Mendelson. 28:57 How employers and payers can have a value assessment approach and a health insurance system that allows access to cost-effective drugs. 29:48 How cost-effective prices are calculated. 31:55 One of the core value underpinnings for value assessment of drugs. 34:54 Why manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers should work together more by referencing something like an ICER report. 36:55 EP426 with Nina Lathia, RPh, MSc, PhD. 38:21 "We can make different choices."   You can learn more at ICER.org and follow Sarah on LinkedIn.   @sarahkemond discusses #pharmaceutical #drugpricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #financialhealth #patientoutcomes #primarycare #digitalhealth #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Stacey Richter (INBW43), Olivia Ross (Take Two: EP240), John Quinn, Dr Sam Flanders and Shane Cerone (EP492), Elizabeth Mitchell (EP491), Shane Cerone and Dr Sam Flanders (Part 1), Dan Greenleaf (Part 2), Dan Greenleaf (Part 1), Mark Cuban and Cora Opsahl

Not gonna give much of an introduction here because this is a short bonus level set, but I did just wanna call everyone's attention to the "arms race" created by our status quo purchasing and selling of many things, pharmaceuticals included. For a full transcript of this episode, click here. If you enjoy this podcast, be sure to subscribe to the free weekly newsletter to be a member of the Relentless Tribe. For example, raise the list price of a drug to maximize rebates, because the higher the list, the bigger the discount you can give, which then exacerbates patient affordability because coinsurance is often based on list price. But then Pharma starts offering co-pay cards, which messes up the whole PBM (pharmacy benefit manager) plan to drive patients to their highest-rebate products (ie, the most profitable products). So then maximizers and accumulators enter the chat, and prior auths ramp up because plans start having to raise premiums after enough 340B drugs with high lists and no rebates, and then there's no cost containment and raise deductibles and around and around we go. Meanwhile, is this drug fundamentally worth the list price or even the net price? Is it an effective drug? What's the right price to be paying for this drug? Should be the operative question, right? Just like what's the quality and appropriateness of any medical service? Maybe we should just quit it and just pay for value. And with that, let me introduce Sarah Emond, CEO of ICER (Institute for Clinical and Economic Review), and I will let Sarah tell the rest of the story. Also mentioned in this episode are Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER); Cora Opsahl; 32 BJ Health Fund; Payerset; Aventria Health Group; Dea Belazi, PharmD, MPH; and Tom Nash. For a list of healthcare industry acronyms and terms that may be unfamiliar to you, click here.   You can learn more at ICER.org and follow Sarah on LinkedIn.   Sarah K. Emond, MPP, is president and chief executive officer of the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), a leading nonprofit health policy research organization, with 25 years of experience in the business and policy of healthcare. She joined ICER in 2009 as its first chief operating officer and third employee and has worked to grow the organization's approach, scope, and impact over the years. Prior to joining ICER, Sarah spent time as a communications consultant, with six years in the corporate communications and investor relations department at a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company and several years with a healthcare communications firm. Sarah began her healthcare career in clinical research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. A graduate of the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University, Sarah holds a Master of Public Policy degree with a concentration in health policy. Sarah also received a bachelor's degree in biological sciences from Smith College. Sarah speaks frequently at national conferences on the topics of prescription drug pricing policy, comparative effectiveness research, and value-based healthcare.   02:28 What is ICER? 02:47 What does the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review do? 05:09 The importance of still showing up, even when others don't understand or disagree. 06:51 EP293 ("Game Theory Gone Wild") with Dea Belazi, PharmD, MPH. 09:04 Why it's important to think about population health and how our choices impact affordability for everyone.   You can learn more at ICER.org and follow Sarah on LinkedIn.   @sarahkemond discusses #ICER and the status quo of #pharmaceuticaldrug #pricing on our #healthcarepodcast. #healthcare #podcast #financialhealth #patientoutcomes #primarycare #digitalhealth #healthcareleadership #healthcaretransformation #healthcareinnovation   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Stacey Richter (INBW43), Olivia Ross (Take Two: EP240), John Quinn, Dr Sam Flanders and Shane Cerone (EP492), Elizabeth Mitchell (EP491), Shane Cerone and Dr Sam Flanders (Part 1), Dan Greenleaf (Part 2), Dan Greenleaf (Part 1), Mark Cuban and Cora Opsahl  

Today, we'll talk with one of the true giants of stroke neurology - Dr. Louis Caplan, Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School and Senior Neurologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. For decades, Dr. Caplan has shaped how we think about stroke. He's authored an enormous body of work -- landmark papers, books, and clinical descriptions that have changed how neurologists around the world recognize and classify strokes. But today, rather than revisiting the past, we'll ask how he sees the future - of stroke, clinical reasoning in an era of AI, and of medicine itself. Dr. Caplan was interviewed by Dr. Sarah Nelson, neurointensivist and Assistant Professor of Neurology at Tufts Medical Center. Series 7, Episode 2  Disclosures: None

Our sixth scholar in the series is Nayantara Biswas is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. She received her Ph.D. in economics from Clark University. Her research focuses on health equity impact evaluations of small-scale interventions and large-scale public policies. We spoke about dissertation titled, The Impact of Social Policies on Reproductive Health, Maternal Employment, and Child Health: Evidence from India. We talked about demand side versus supply side policy interventions in public health, India's maternal health policy landscape, the ASHA workers program, variation across states in policy impact and much more.  Recorded August 28th, 2025. Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links. Connect with Ideas of India Follow us on X Follow Shruti on X Follow Nayantara on X Click here for the latest Ideas of India episodes sent straight to your inbox. Timestamps (00:00:00) - Intro (00:01:35) - Setting the Stage (00:04:44) - India's Maternal–Child Health Policy Landscape (00:08:29) - Uneven Progress: State Differences, Culture, and Measurement Challenges (00:09:24) - Who Are the ASHA Workers? (00:11:56) - Trust, Access, and the Information Channel (00:14:26) - Pay, Hours, and Unionization: Why Conditions Vary by State (00:16:50) - How Incentives Are Structured (00:21:44) - From Design to Data: Building the District-Level Panel (00:25:20) - We Are Measuring ASHAs—and Something Else (00:26:45) - DiD Simplified: How the Causal Claim Works (00:33:45) - Policy Implications: Where to Invest and How to Train (00:36:53) - Cost-Effectiveness: Supply vs. Demand (00:39:53) - Why Supply-Side Effects Take Time (00:41:50) - Beyond Pregnancy: Anganwadi Daycare and Women's Work (00:46:27) - Outro

What if changing what kids eat at school could transform their behavior, boost learning, and even save lives? Studies show that when kids swap junk food for real, nourishing meals, behavior problems drop, focus improves, and learning soars—with one study finding a 100% reduction in suicides among youth simply by changing their diet. Across the country, schools are proving that scratch-cooked, colorful meals made from whole ingredients can fit tight budgets, reduce waste, and make kids excited to eat. By putting nutritious food at the center of education, we can help raise a generation that's healthier, happier, and ready to learn. In this episode, Jill Shah, Sam Kass, Kimbal Musk, and I talk about the powerful connection between nutrition and education, showing that healthy school meals can transform not just kids' diets but their futures. Jill Shah is the President of the Shah Family Foundation, which drives innovative work at the intersection of education, healthcare, and community in Boston. Her leadership focuses on improving access to healthy school food, supporting neighborhood food equity, and fostering collaboration between schools and healthcare to strengthen children's physical, emotional, and social well-being. Before launching the foundation, Jill was a successful entrepreneur involved in several internet startups, including iXL, RxCentric, and Mercator Software, and later founded Jill's List, which she sold to MINDBODY in 2013. A graduate of Providence College, she now serves on the boards of the Red Sox Foundation, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, the Museum of Fine Arts, Belmont Hill School, and the Winsor School. Jill's commitment to community innovation has earned her honors such as the Boston Chamber of Commerce Distinguished Bostonian Award and the Playworks Game Changer Award. Sam Kass was senior policy advisor for nutrition policy in the Obama Administration and is currently an investor in several food technology start-ups. One of Michelle Obama's longest-serving advisors, Sam was the executive director of her Let's Move initiative and helped create the first major vegetable garden at the White House since Eleanor Roosevelt's Victory Garden. He is a graduate of the University of Chicago and was trained by one of Austria's greatest chefs, Christian Domschitz. Kimbal Musk is the co-founder of The Kitchen, an American bistro with restaurant locations in Boulder, Denver, Chicago, and soon Austin. Now marking its twentieth anniversary, The Kitchen serves thoughtfully sourced, Seasonal American Shared Plates with global influences. Musk is also the co-founder of Big Green, a philanthropic organization devoted to getting every American growing food. His personal mission is to empower and invest in the next generation who are building a healthier, happier future. The Wall Street Journal has called him a "cheerful crusader for real food," and The Guardian has lauded how he “takes the tech entrepreneur ethos and applies it to food.” Musk has been named a Global Social Entrepreneur by the World Economic Forum. Musk currently sits on the board of Tesla Inc. and formerly served on the board of Chipotle Mexican Grill and SpaceX. This episode is brought to you by BIOptimizers. Head to bioptimizers.com/hyman and use code HYMAN to save 15%. Full-length episodes can be found here:How To Improve School Lunches, Grades, And Behavior At No Extra Cost Why Pizza And Fries Can Be Claimed As Vegetables Through School Lunch Programs How To Fix Nutrition In Schools

The audio recording of this conversation was compromised and you may need to adjust volume settings for certain portions of the recording. We are deeply sorry for the inconvenience. Dr. Yasmeen Abu Fraiha is a medical doctor with a specialty in internal medicine, currently completing a clinical fellowship in critical care at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, combined with a research fellowship at the Middle East Initiative at Harvard Kennedy School. Her research focuses on healthcare policy and politics that create inequality in health services and outcomes for underserved communities.  She formerly served as the Health Policy Director at the Task Force for Health Promotion and Equity in the Arab Society at the Israeli Ministry of Health, leading major efforts and interventions to deal with health disparities between Jews and Arabs in Israel.   She co-founded two NGOs that promote socio-economic development of the Bedouin community in Israel, while focusing on health, education, women's employment, housing and community empowerment. She has won several awards, including the 2007 Ramon Award for quality, leadership, and excellence and was chosen to be part of Forbes' “30 Under 30” list. In 2023, she was named one of Israel's 50 most influential women by Globes Magazine.  Yasmeen holds a BSc and MD from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and an MPA from Harvard Kennedy School.

Send us a textC4 Leaders – the ONLY nonprofit to utilize the pizza making process to create space for our companions to be seen, heard, and loved.   We work with businesses, sports teams, hospitals, churches…anyone looking to RISE TOGETHER.  We also write children's books and use the most amazing handmade, hand-tossed, sourdough pizza to bring out the best in each other.   Please check out PIZZADAYS.ORG to support our important work. Season 5 Episode #23 Dr. Kate Lund is coming from Edmonds, Washington (inform, inspire, & transform)You can find via her website katelundspeaks.comAbout our guest: Growing up with Hydrocephalus took the ordinary out of her childhood. Numerous surgeries, countless doctor visits and relentless recovery periods had become the norm for Kate.  But through it all, she found one thing that kept her thriving – the power of resilience in extraordinary circumstances. Building her life around finding incredible possibility on the other side of challenge kept her driven and ultimately helped Kate find her true calling.Today, Kate is a licensed clinical psychologist of 15 years, peak performance coach, best-selling author and TEDx speaker. Her specialized training in medical psychology includes world-renowned Shriners Hospital for Children, Boston, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, all of which are affiliated with Harvard Medical School. Kate uses a strengths-based approached to help her clients improve their confidence in school, sports and life while helping them to become more resilient and reach their full potential at all levels.Thanks for sharing your many gifts, for putting your courage, thoughts, experience, and insight on paper (three times) and for guiding all people to see life's adversities as opportunities for growth and understanding.   Welcome to the show! TOTD – “Your actions are your only true belongings.”  Thich Nhat HanhBuild a habit - to create intention - to live your purpose! In this episode:What was life like growing up?What are your life's essential ingredients?What is ResilienceThe power of managing our emotions – RULER…Self-Awareness, Social Awareness, Self-Management, Practical tools to use to help maintain homeostasis…Mantra…FriendshipSocial Demands of being humanBooks you recommendLegacy 

In this episode, Amber Borucki, MD from Stanford Medicine, joins Host Sudheer Potru, DO, FASA, FASAM, and Co-Host Zafeer Baber, MD, to discuss acetaminophen use during pregnancy and childhood. They focus on a significant Swedish study that dispels myths about acetaminophen's links to autism, reinforcing its safety and effectiveness. Dr. Borucki highlights its role in pain management for expectant mothers and children, while the hosts discuss alternatives to opioids, like acetaminophen and ibuprofen, and stress the importance of consulting healthcare providers for proper dosing and guidance.About the GuestDr. Amber Borucki is an anesthesiologist and pain medicine specialist focused on chronic pain management in children and young adults, particularly after surgery or due to chronic conditions. She earned her medical degree from Rush Medical College and completed her residency at the University of Chicago. Dr. Borucki also underwent fellowships in pediatric anesthesiology and adult/pediatric pain medicine at Boston Children's Hospital, Brigham Women's Hospital, and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. After a year of private practice in Reno, Nevada, she spent five years at UCSF as a pediatric anesthesiologist and the Director of the Pediatric Anesthesia Service at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital.   

When cancer treatment ends, the world expects celebration. The bell is rung, and everyone around breathes a sigh of relief. But for many survivors, that moment marks not an ending, but a new, confusing beginning. The medical team steps back, the appointments stop, and a quiet question creeps in: now what? Survivorship is more than the absence of disease. It's the long, often lonely process of learning how to live again, in a body, mind, and identity forever changed. Fatigue lingers. Treatment dulls memory and focus. Sleep becomes elusive. And beneath it all is the fear: what if it comes back? But what if recovery after cancer isn't just about waiting for the next scan; it's about reclaiming control? Through lifestyle medicine, survivors can begin to rebuild their strength, calm their nervous system, and lower their risk of recurrence. What measures are important for the survivor phase of cancer care? Why is connection and community so important? In this episode, the Medical Director of the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham, Dr. Amy Comander, returns. The pioneer in lifestyle medicine for survivorship joins us to share what true recovery looks like. She shares insights from her groundbreaking Paving the Path to Wellness program, and we talk about how to have a healthy life after the end of cancer treatment. Things You'll Learn In This Episode -Survivorship isn't just surviving Finishing treatment is only the beginning of recovery. How do survivors move from merely existing to truly thriving? -Movement as medicine Exercise doesn't just build strength; it improves outcomes and lowers recurrence risk. What type of movement makes the biggest impact after cancer? -Food over fear The right diet can reduce inflammation, support immunity, and ease anxiety about recurrence. What does the research actually say about the best foods for survivors, and which supplements to avoid? -The overlooked healing power of connection Support groups and social bonds can dramatically improve the quality of life and survival. Why is community one of the most potent yet underused forms of medicine? Guest Bio Dr. Amy Comander specializes in the care of women with breast cancer. Dr. Comander is Medical Director of the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham, where she also serves as Director of Breast Oncology and Cancer Survivorship at the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham and at Newton Wellesley Hospital. She is the director of Lifestyle Medicine at the Mass General Cancer Center and an Instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. She received her undergraduate degree and a master's degree in Neuroscience at Harvard University. She received her medical degree from Yale University School of Medicine. She completed her Internal Medicine residency training and Hematology-Oncology fellowship training at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School. She is board-certified in Hematology and Medical Oncology, and she is a Diplomat of the American Board of Lifestyle Medicine. Dr. Comander has a strong interest in improving the quality of life and outcome of cancer survivors through important lifestyle interventions, including physical activity, diet, and mind/body interventions. She promotes healthy lifestyles for both her active treatment patients as well as those in the survivorship phase of care. She has launched PAVING the Path to Wellness, a 12-week lifestyle medicine-based survivorship program for women with breast cancer. Connect with Dr. Comander on LinkedIn. Resources The MGH Cancer Center is recruiting cancer survivors with insomnia for two behavioral treatment trials testing the Survivorship Sleep Program, a cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) skills program developed at MGH (PI: Daniel Hall, PhD; NCBI - WWW Error Blocked Diagnostic ; NCBI - WWW Error Blocked Diagnostic ). Eligible patients may be in treatment, post-treatment, or living with advanced cancer. All procedures are remote. Compensation is provided. Patients may see our study flyer and MGB Rally website (Rally | Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Cancer Survivors with Insomnia ). Structured Exercise after Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer | NEJM Healthy Eating Plate • The Nutrition Source 10 Cancer Prevention Recommendations About Your Host Hosted by Dr. Deepa Grandon, MD, MBA, a triple board-certified physician with over 23 years of experience working as a Physician Consultant for influential organizations worldwide. Dr. Grandon is the founder of Transformational Life Consulting (TLC) and an outspoken faith-based leader in evidence-based lifestyle medicine. Resources Feeling stuck and want guidance on how to transform your spiritual, mental and physical well being? Get access to Dr Deepa's 6 Pillars of Health video! Visit drdeepa-tlc.org to subscribe and watch the video for free. ‌ Work with Me Ready to explore a personalized wellness journey with Dr. Deepa? Visit drdeepa-tlc.org and click on "Work with Me" to schedule a free intake call. Together, we'll see if this exclusive program aligns with your needs! Want to receive a devotional every week From Dr. Deepa? Devotionals are dedicated to providing you with a moment of reflection, inspiration, and spiritual growth each week, delivered right to your inbox. Visit https://www.drdeepa-tlc.org/devotional-opt-in to subscribe for free. Ready to deepen your understanding of trauma and kick start your healing journey? Explore a range of online and onsite courses designed to equip you with practical and affordable tools. From counselors, ministry leaders, and educators to couples, parents and individuals seeking help for themselves, there's a powerful course for everyone. Browse all the courses now to start your journey. ​​TLC is presenting this podcast as a form of information sharing only. It is not medical advice or intended to replace the judgment of a licensed physician. TLC is not responsible for any claims related to procedures, professionals, products, or methods discussed in the podcast, and it does not approve or endorse any products, professionals, services, or methods that might be referenced. Check out this episode on our website, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and don't forget to leave a review if you like what you heard. Your review feeds the algorithm so our show reaches more people. Thank you!

When a patient presents with portal vein thrombosis (PVT), how do you decide between anticoagulation, intervention, and adjunct therapies? In this episode, Dr. Vijay Ramalingam, vascular and interventional radiologist from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, joins Backtable host Dr. Chris Beck to share his approach to evaluation and management of both acute and chronic PVT.---SYNPOSISThe discussion begins with an overview of the Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis Multidisciplinary Clinic at Beth Israel– a collaboration between Interventional Radiology, Hepatology/Gastroenterology, Surgery and Hematology. Dr. Ramalingam details the clinic's workflow, from initial case conference to the comprehensive single-day patient workup that includes imaging, lab work, and consultations with all three specialties. He shares his algorithm for treatment decisions, breaking down the distinct management pathways for patients with and without cirrhosis, and for those with acute vs. chronic thrombosis.Finally, Dr. Ramalingam details his portal vein recanalization technique during procedure, providing a step-by-step guide to his preferred dual-access approach for complex cases, including his method for trans-splenic access and his trick on how to safely close the splenic tract. He also explains when it's appropriate to use adjunctive therapies like suction thrombectomy and catheter-directed lysis, and describes preliminary data showing that their comprehensive approach leads to a change in management for about 40% of patients.---TIMESTAMPS00:00 - Introduction05:35 - Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis Multidisciplinary Clinic22:24 - Multidisciplinary Approach26:17 - PVT Classification38:47 - Treatment Evaluation and Intervention44:21 - Alternative Treatment Options for PVT49:00 - Procedural Techniques59:53 - Adjunct Techniques and Case Studies01:02:58 - Review of Preliminary Data & Final Thoughts

Send us a textDr. Kate Lund is a licensed clinical psychologist of 15 years, peak performance coach, best-selling author and TEDx speaker. Her specialized training in medical psychology includes world-renowned Shriners Hospital for Children, Boston, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, all of which are affiliated with Harvard Medical School. She uses a strengths-based approach to help her clients improve their confidence in school, sports and life while helping them to become more resilient and reach their full potential at all levels. She is also the author of Step Away: The Keys to Resilient Parenting and has a podcast called ”The Optimized Mind.”You can find Dr. Lund online at https://www.katelundspeaks.com/Dyslexia Journey has conversations and explorations to help you support the dyslexic child in your life. Content includes approaches, tips, and interviews with a range of guests from psychologists to educators to people with dyslexia. Increase your understanding and connection with your child as you help them embrace their uniqueness and thrive on this challenging journey!Send us your questions, comments, and guest suggestions to parentingdyslexiajourney@gmail.comAlso check out our YouTube channel! https://www.youtube.com/@ParentingDyslexiaJourney

In this episode of Celiac Straight Talk, we are joined by Beyond Celiac Director of Scientific Affairs Amy Ratner, who kindly agreed to interview our guest, Dr. Ciaran Kelly of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center on his experience diagnosing celiac disease.  You can find all episodes of Celiac Straight Talk anywhere you listen to podcasts and on our website at BeyondCeliac.org. Thank you so much to Takeda Pharmaceuticals for sponsoring this episode of Celiac Straight Talk and their commitment to supporting disease awareness and celiac disease patients. 

Alice “Ali” Domar, Ph.D. is a pioneer in the field of mind/body medicine. She conducts ongoing ground-breaking research which focuses on the relationship between stress and various medical conditions, as well as the impact of lifestyle habits on mental and physical health. She joined Inception Fertility in 2022 as Chief Compassion Officer. She is also an associate professor in obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, part-time, at Harvard Medical School, and a senior staff psychologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.   Dr. Domar is the author of numerous books, including Conquering Infertility and her latest book, Finding Calm for the Expectant Mom. She is on the advisory board for Parents Magazine, Resolve, and Easy Eats. She has been on the Board of Experts for LLuminari and a columnist for Redbook and Health magazines. She was also a featured expert on the online social health network BeWell.com CONNECT WITH DVORA ENTIN: Website: https://www.dvoraentin.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dvoraentin YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@misconceptionspodcast        

In lieu of a regular show, McNamara on Money is taking a pause this week to honor and remember one of our own: Kirk Buchanan Reed—known to many as “Duke” or “K Money.” Kirk was a Certified Financial Planner practitioner at McNamara Financial Services in Marshfield. After a brave and tough three-year battle with cancer, he passed away peacefully on August 29, 2025—his 45th birthday. Kirk spent 20 years with McNamara Financial and was a regular, trusted voice on this program. If you've listened to the show, you knew he was sharp, thoughtful, and always ready with a good story or a laugh. And if you knew him personally, you knew he had a huge heart and a serious love for great music. His loss is deeply felt by all of us—his family, friends, clients, and listeners. Kirk was born in Barberton, Ohio, in 1980. After graduating from Villanova University with a degree in Mechanical Engineering, he found his true calling as a Financial Advisor with McNamara Financial. He never met a golf course, bowling alley, or IPA he didn't like, and he was known for his quick wit, generosity, and thoughtful nature. He is survived by his children Myla (15), Callie (14), and Arden (12), their mother Alyssa, his parents Michael and Brenda, his sister Stacey, and his companion MaryEllen and her children Jace, Skye, and Meadow. His presence in their lives—and in ours—will never be forgotten. The Reed family has asked that, in lieu of flowers, donations be made to the Cancer Research Institute at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. You can find the link for contributions in the show notes. Kirk's wit, kindness, and friendship shaped not only this show but the lives of everyone who had the privilege of knowing him. We are grateful for the time we shared, and we will carry his memory with us in the episodes to come. We'll return next week with our regular programming. For now, we invite you to join us in remembering Kirk, in keeping his family in your thoughts, and in celebrating a life well-lived. https://www.bidmc.org/research/research-centers/cancer-research-institute

We spoke to two researchers who disagree about the answer to this question. But they do agree about why it's so hard to answer to begin with. Guests: Dylan Scott, senior correspondent at Vox; Kenneth Mukamal, physician and academic researcher at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center; Timothy Naimi, director of the University of Victoria's Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research For show transcripts, go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠vox.com/unxtranscripts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠For more, go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠vox.com/unexplainable⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠And please email us! ⁠⁠⁠unexplainable@vox.com⁠⁠⁠We read every email.Support Unexplainable (and get ad-free episodes) by becoming a Vox Member today: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠vox.com/members⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Thank you! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Charlotte Blease is an interdisciplinary health researcher at the Department of Women's and Children's Health at Uppsala University, Sweden, and the Digital Psychiatry Division at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center at the Harvard Medical School. She is a former Fulbright Scholar and a winner in 2012 of the UK-wide BBC Radio 3's New Generation Thinkers Competition. Dr. Blease has written extensively about the ethics of placebo and nocebo effects. Her research has been profiled by international news outlets including The Washington Post, The Guardian, and The Sydney Morning Herald. Her latest book is Dr. Bot: Why Doctors Can Fail Us―and How AI Could Save Lives. In this episode, we focus on Dr. Bot. We start by talking about medical error, whether doctors are essential, barriers in accessing medicine, and symptom denial. We discuss which are the better interviewers: doctors or computers. We talk about the limitations of doctors in diagnostics and treatment, and whether AI can do better. We discuss whether AI can be biased. Finally, we talk about the role that AI can play in medicine.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, HEDIN BRØNNER, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, HUGO B., JAMES, JORDAN MANSFIELD, CHARLOTTE ALLEN, PETER STOYKO, DAVID TONNER, LEE BECK, PATRICK DALTON-HOLMES, NICK KRASNEY, RACHEL ZAK, AND DENNIS XAVIER!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, AND JOSHUA WOOD!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

Can the CRA really be fixed in 100 days? Guest: Alex Klyguine, tax lawyer specializing in tax litigation What is “Weaponized incompetence?” Guest: Matt Lundquist, founder and director of Tribeca Therapy in New York Why are more and more Orcas ramming boats? Guest: Naomi Rose, senior scientist of marine mammal biology at the Animal Welfare Institute You should stop taking your phone to the bathroom Guest: Dr. Trisha Pasricha, a gastroenterologist and director of the Gut-Brain Research Institute at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston Can Mark Carney reform our bail system? Guest: Jordan Gold, criminal defence lawyer Doctors want more restrictions on gambling ads Guest: Paul Burns, CEO of the Canadian Gaming Association Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You should stop taking your phone to the bathroom Guest: Dr. Trisha Pasricha, a gastroenterologist and director of the Gut-Brain Research Institute at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How can AI improve our healthcare industry? In this episode, Dr Emma Yhnell speaks to health informaticist and author Dr Charlotte Blease about the role AI could play in the future of medicine, from making it more accessible to helping lighten the hours of a burnt-out workforce.  Healthcare systems around the world are under mounting pressure. Healthcare professionals are amongst the most overworked, with half of all US doctors being burnt out and 42% of UK  doctors feeling unable to cope with their weekly workload. Studies show that burnout is linked to increased rates of error and harm, which in the medical industry could mean the difference between catching a diagnosis in time or risking a patient's life. But Dr Charlotte Blease argues that this need not be the case. It is time to thoughtfully implement the new technologies of our age to revolutionize the healthcare industry. AI can help us to overhaul a system that is reaching capacity and has the potential to change lives, both for doctors and their patients.  Dr Charlotte Blease is a health informaticist with a background in philosophy. She has published more than 150 peer-reviewed journals and books on healthcare and is an Associate Professor at the Participatory eHealth and Health Data Research Group at Uppsala University and Researcher at Digital Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School. Her latest book is Dr Bot: Why Doctors Can Fail and How AI Could Save Lives. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How many times have we heard that weight loss and maintenance is simply “calories in, calories out?” Well, the equation may be rooted in thermodynamics, but the reality is biology, history, hormones, and a whole lot more. This week, endocrinologist and Harvard obesity researcher Dr. Jody Dushay breaks down why this concept is far more complex than the numbers on a food label or how many calories our devices tell us we've burned. From how your body actually absorbs calories to how (or not) it expends them, we explore how and why weight gain and loss anything but straightforward—especially during menopause, when shifting body composition, gut microbiome changes, altered insulin responses, and evolving hormone levels, create a whole new metabolic landscape. As you'll see, your body isn't a calculator—it's a dynamic, adapting system. We also revisit GLP-1 drugs, which are increasingly popular with midlife women, and where they fit in this whole equation (so to speak). Jody Dushay, MD, MMSc, is an endocrinologist at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. She is also the founder and director of Well Powered, a comprehensive wellness and weight management program. Dr Dushay has studied the effect of pharmacotherapies and dietary interventions on body weight for years, including a large single-site study examining the effects of a glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist on body weight in obese women without diabetes. As a triathlete, she has qualified for Kona 3 times and came in 2nd in her age group at the 2020 Ironman World Championship in St George. You can learn more about her and her work at wellpowered.org.Resources:Dr. Jody Dushay's research:Short-term exenatide treatment leads to significant weight loss in a subset of obese women without diabetesWeight Loss Outcomes Among Early High Responders to Exenatide Treatment: A Randomized, Placebo Controlled Study in Overweight and Obese WomenSign up for our FREE Feisty 40+ newsletter: https://feistymedia.ac-page.com/feisty-40-sign-up-page Learn More and Register for our Feisty 40+ Strong Retreat: https://www.womensperformance.com/strongretreat Follow Us on Instagram:Feisty Menopause: @feistymenopause Hit Play Not Pause Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/807943973376099 Support our Partners:Phosis: Use the code FEISTY15 for 15% off at https://www.phosis.com/ Midi Health: You Deserve to Feel Great. Book your virtual visit today at https://www.joinmidi.com/Hettas: Use code FEISTY20 for 20% off at https://hettas.com/ Previnex: Get 15% off your first order with code HITPLAY at https://www.previnex.com/ This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Spotify Ad Analytics - https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/ad-analytics-privacy-policy/Podcorn - https://podcorn.com/privacyPodscribe - https://podscribe.com/privacy

Essential tremor is the most common movement disorder, although it is often misdiagnosed. A careful history and clinical examination for other neurologic findings, such as bradykinesia, dystonia, or evidence of peripheral neuropathy, can reveal potential alternative etiologies. Knowledge about epidemiology and associated health outcomes is important for counseling and monitoring for physical impairment and disability. In this episode, Lyell Jones, MD, FAAN, speaks with Ludy C. Shih, MD, MMSc, FAAN, author of the article “Essential Tremor” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Shih is clinical director of the Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Center at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. Additional Resources Read the article: Essential Tremor Subscribe to Continuum®: shop.lww.com/Continuum Earn CME (available only to AAN members): continpub.com/AudioCME Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): continpub.com/Aloud More about the American Academy of Neurology: aan.com Social Media facebook.com/continuumcme @ContinuumAAN Host: @LyellJ Guest: @ludyshihmd Full episode transcript available here Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today, I'm interviewing Dr Ludy Shih, who recently authored an article on essential tremor for our latest issue of Continuum on movement disorders. Dr Shih is an associate professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School and the clinical director of the Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorder Center at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Dr Shih, welcome, and thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourself to our listeners? Dr Shih: Thank you, Dr Jones, for having me. It's a real pleasure to be here on the podcast with you. I'm a neurologist, I trained in movement disorders fellowship, and I currently see patients and conduct clinical research. We offer a variety of treatments and diagnostic tests for our patients with movement disorders. And I have developed this interest, a clinical research interest in essential tremor. Dr Jones: And so, as an expert in essential tremor, the perfect person to write such a really spectacular article. And I can't wait for our listeners to hear more about it and our subscribers to read it. And let's get right to it. If you had, Dr Shih, a single most important message for our listeners about caring for patients with essential tremor, what would that message be? Dr Shih: Yeah, I think the takeaway that I've learned over the years is that people with essential tremor do develop quite a few other symptoms. And although we propose that essential tremor is this pure tremor disorder, they can experience a lot of different comorbidities. Now, there is some debate as to whether that is expected for essential tremor or is this some part of another syndrome, which we may talk about later in the interview. But the fact of the matter is, it's not a benign condition and people do experience some disability from it. Dr Jones: And I think that speaks to how the name of this disorder has evolved over time. right? You point out in your article, it used to be called benign essential tremor or benign familial tremor. But it's really not so straightforward as it. And fairly frequently these symptoms, the patient's tremor, can be functionally limiting, correct? Dr Shih: That is correct. In fact, the reason I probably started getting interested in essential tremor was because our center had been doing a lot of deep brain stimulation for essential tremor, which is remarkably effective, especially for tremor that reaches an amplitude that really no oral medication is going to satisfyingly treat. And if you have enough upper limb disability from this very large-amplitude tremor, a surgical option may make a lot of sense for a lot of patients. And yet, how did they get to that point? Do they continue to progress? These were the sort of interesting questions that got raised in my mind as I started to treat these folks. Dr Jones: We'll come back to treatment in just a minute here, because there are many options, and it sounds like the options are expanding. To start with the diagnosis- I mean, this is an extraordinarily common disorder. As you point out, it is the most common movement disorder in the US and maybe the world, and yet it seems to be underrecognized and frequently misdiagnosed. Why do you think that is? Dr Shih: Great question. It's been pretty consistent, with several case series over the decades showing a fairly high rate of quote/unquote “misdiagnosis.” And I think it speaks to two things, probably. One is that once someone sees a postural and kinetic tremor of the arms, immediately they think of essential tremor because it is quite common. But there's a whole host of things that it could actually be. And the biggest one that we also have to factor in is also the heterogeneity of the presentation of Parkinson's disease. Many people, and I think increasingly now these days, can present with not a whole lot of the other symptoms, but may present with an atypical tremor. And it becomes actually a little hard to sort out, well, do they have enough of these other symptoms for me to suspect Parkinson's, or is the nature of their tremor suspicious enough that it would just be so unusual that this stays essential tremor and doesn't eventually develop into Parkinson's disease? And I think those are the questions that we all still grapple with from time to time in some of our clinics. Dr Jones: Probably some other things related to it with, you know, our understanding of the pathophysiology and the availability of tests. And I do want to come back to those questions here in just a minute, but, you know, just the nomenclature of this disorder… I think our clinical listeners are familiar with our tendency in medicine to use words like essential or idiopathic to describe disorders or phenomena where we don't understand the precise underlying mechanism. When I'm working with our trainees, I call these “job-security terms” because it sounds less humbling than “you have a tremor and we don't know what causes it,” right? So, your article does a really nice job outlining the absence of a clear monogenic or Mendelian mechanism for essential tremor. Do you think we'll ever have a eureka moment in neurology for this disorder and maybe give it a different name? Dr Shih: It's a great question. I think as we're learning with a lot of our neurologic diseases---and including, I would even say, Parkinson's disease, to which ET gets compared to a lot---there's already now so much more known complexity to something that has a very specific idea and concept in people's minds. So, I tend to think we'll still be in an area where we'll have a lot of different causes of tremor, but I'm hopeful that we'll uncover some new mechanisms for which treating or addressing that mechanism would take care of the tremor in a way that we haven't been able to make as much progress on in the last few decades as maybe we would have thought given all the advances in in technology. Dr Jones: That's very helpful, and we'll be hopeful for that series of discoveries that lead us to that point. I think many of our listeners will be familiar with the utility---and, I think, even for most insurance companies, approval---for DAT scans to discriminate between essential tremor and Parkinsonian disorders. What about lab work? Are there any other disorders that you commonly screen for in patients who you suspect may have essential tremor? Dr Shih: Yeah, it's a great question. And I think, you know, I'm always mindful that what I'm seeing in my clinic may not always be representative of what's seen in the community or out in practice. I'll give an example. You know, most of the time when people come to the academic Medical Center, they're thinking, gosh, I've tried this or that. I've been on these medicines for the last ten years. But I've had essential tremor for twenty years. We get to benefit a little bit from all that history that's been laid down. And so, it's not as likely you're going to misdiagnose it. But once in a while, you'll get someone with tremor that just started a month ago or just started, you know, 2 or 3 months ago. And you have to still be thinking, well, I've got to get out of the specialist clinic mindset, and think, well, what else really could this be? And so, while it's true for everybody, moreso in those cases, in those recent onset cases, you really got to be looking for things like medications, electrolyte abnormalities, and new-onset thyroid disorder, for example, thyroid toxicosis. Dr Jones: Very helpful. And your article has a wonderful list of the conditions to consider, including the medications that might be used for those conditions that might result or unmask a tremor of a different cause. And I think being open-minded and not anchoring on essential tremor just because it's common, I think is a is a key point here. And another feature in your article that I really enjoyed was your step-by-step approach to tremor. What are those steps? Dr Shih: Well, I think you know first of all, tremor is such common terminology that even lay people, patients, nonclinicians will use the word “tremor.” And so, it can be tempting when the notes on your schedule says referred for tremor to sort of immediately jump to that. I think the first step is, is it tremor? And that's really something that the clinician first has to decide. And I think that's a really important step. A lot of things can look superficially like tremor, and you shouldn't even assume that another clinician knows what tremor looks like as opposed to, say, myoclonus. Or for example a tremor of the mouth; well, it actually could be orolingual or orobuccal dyskinesia, as in tardive dyskinesia. And another one that tremor can look like is ataxia. And so, I think- while they sound obvious to most neurologists, perhaps, I think that---especially in the area of myoclonus, where it can be quite repetitive, quite small amplitude in some conditions---it can really resemble a tremor. And so, there are examples of these where making that first decision of whether it's a tremor or not can really be a good sort of time-out to make sure you're going down the right path to begin with. And I think what's helpful is to think about some of the clinical definitions of a tremor. And tremor is really rhythmic, it's oscillatory. You should see an agonist and antagonist muscle group moving back and forth, to and fro. And then it's involuntary. And so, I think these descriptors can really help; and to help isolate, if you can describe it in your note, you can probably be more convinced that you're dealing with the tremor. The second step that I would encourage people to really consider: you've established it's a tremor. The most important part exam now becomes, really, the nontremor part of the exam. And it should be really comprehensive to think of what else could be accompanying this, because that's really how we make diagnosis of other things besides essential tremor. There really should be a minimum of evidence of parkinsonism, dystonia, neuropathy, ataxia- and the ataxia could be either from a peripheral or central nervous system etiology. Those are the big four or five things that, you know, I'm very keen to look for and will look pretty much in the head, neck, the axial sort of musculature, as well as the limbs. And I think this is very helpful in terms of identifying cases which turn out to have either, say, well, Parkinson's or even a typical Parkinson disorder; or even a genetic disorder, maybe even something like a fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome; or even a spinal cerebellar ataxia. These cases are rare, but I think if you uncover just enough ataxia, for example, that really shouldn't be there in a person, let's say, who's younger and also doesn't have a long history of tremor; you should be more suspicious that this is not essential tremor that you're dealing with. And then the last thing is, once you've identified the tremor and you're trying to establish, well, what should be done about the tremor, you really have to say what kind of tremor it is so that you can follow it, so you can convey to other people really what the disability is coming from the tremor and how severe the tremor is. So, I think an example of this is, often in the clinic, people will have their patients extend their arms and hands and kind of say, oh, it's an essential tremor, and that's kind of the end of the exam. But it doesn't give you the flavor. Sometimes you'll have a patient come in and have a fairly minimal postural tremor, but then you go out, take those extra few seconds to go grab a cup of water or two cups of water and have them pour or drink. And now all of a sudden you see this tremor is quite large-amplitude and very disabling. Now you have a better appreciation of what you really need to do for this patient, and it might not be present with just these very simple maneuvers that you have at bedside without props and items. And then the severity of it; you know, we're so used to saying mild, moderate, severe. I think what we've done in the Tremor Research Group to use and develop the Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale is to get people used to trying to estimate what size the tremor is. And you can do that by taking a ruler or developing a sense of what 1 centimeter, 2 centimeters, 3 centimeters looks like. I think it'd be tremendously helpful too, it's very easy and quick to convey severity in a given patient. Dr Jones: I appreciate you, you know, having a patient-centered approach to the- how this is affecting them and being quantitative in the assessment of the tremor. And that's a great segue to a key question that I run into and I think others run into, which is when to initiate therapy? You know, if you see a patient who, let's say they have a mild tremor or, you know, something that quantitatively is on the mild end of the spectrum, and you have, you know, a series of options… from a medication perspective, you have to say, well, when does this across that threshold of being more likely to benefit the patient than to harm the patient? How do you approach that question? What's your threshold for starting medication? Dr Shih: Yeah. You know, sometimes I will ask, because---and I know this sounds like a strange question---because I feel like my patients will come for a couple of different reasons. Sometimes it's usually one over the other. I think people can get concerned about a symptom of a tremor. So, I actually will ask them, was your goal to just get a sense for what this tremor is caused by? I understand that many people who develop tremor might be concerned it might be something like Parkinson's disease. Or is this also a tremor that is bothering you in day-to-day life? And often you will hear the former. No, I just wanted to get checked out and make sure you don't think it's Parkinson's. It doesn't bother me enough that I want to take medication. They're quite happy with that. And then the second scenario is more the, yeah, no, it bothers me and it's embarrassing. And that's a very common answer you may hear, may be embarrassing, people are noticing. It's funny in that many people with essential tremor don't come to see a doctor or even the neurologist for many years. And they will put up with it for a very long time. And they've adopted all sorts of compensatory strategies, and they've just been able to handle themselves very admirably with this, in some cases, very severe tremor. So, for some of them, it'll take a lot to come to the doctor, and then it becomes clear. They said, I think I'm at the point where I need to do something about this tremor. And so, I think those three buckets are often sort of where my patients fall into. And I think asking them directly will give you a sense of that. But you know, it can be a nice time to try some as-needed doses of something like Propranolol, or if it's something that you know that they're going to need something on day-to-day to get control of the tremor over time, there are other options for that as well. Dr Jones: Seems like a perfect scenario for shared decision-making. Is it bothersome enough to the patient to try the therapy? And I like that suggestion. That's a nice pearl that you could start with an a- needed beta blocker, right, with Propranolol. And this is a question that I think many of us struggle with as well. If you've followed a patient with essential tremor for some time and you've tried different medications and they've either lost effectiveness or have intolerable adverse effects, what is your threshold for referring a patient for at least considering a surgical neurostimulator therapy for their essential tremor? Dr Shih: Yeah, so surgical therapies for tremor have been around for a long time now, since 1997, which was when it was approved by the FDA for essential tremor and Parkinson tremor. And then obviously since then, we have a couple more options in the focus ultrasound thalamotomy, which is a lesioning technique. When you have been on several tremor medications, the list gets smaller and smaller. It- and then chance of likely satisfying benefit from some of these medications can be small and small as you pass through the first and second line agents and these would be the Propranolol and the primidone. And as you say, quite a few patients- it's estimated between 30 to 50% of these patients end up not tolerating these first two medications and end up discontinuing them. Some portion of that might also be due to the fact that some of our patients who have been living with essential tremor for decades now, to the point that their tremor is getting worse, are also getting older. And so, polypharmacy and/or some of the potential side effects of beta blockers and anticonvulsants like primidone may be harder to bear in an older adult. And then as you talk about in the article, there's some level of evidence for topiramate, and then from there a number of anticonvulsants or benzos, which have even weaker evidence for them. It's a personal decision. As I tell folks, look, this is not going to likely extend your life or save your life, but it's a quality of life issue. And of course, if there are other things going on in life that need to be taken care of and they need that kind of care and attention, then, you know, you don't need to be adding this to your plate. But if you are in the position where those other things are actually okay, but quality of life is really affected by your being unable to use your upper limbs in the way that you would like to… A lot of people's hobbies and applications are upper limb-based, and enjoying those things is really important. Then I think that this is something- a conversation that we begin and we begin by talking about yes, there are some risks involved, but fortunately this is the data we have on it, which is a fairly extensive experience in terms of this is the risk of, you know, surgery-related side effects. This is the risk of if you're having stimulation from DBS stimulation-related side effects, which can be adjustable. It's interesting, I was talking with colleagues, you know, after focused ultrasound thalamotomy was approved. That really led more people to come to the clinic and start having these discussions, because that seemed like a very the different sort of approach where hardware wasn't needed, but it was still a surgery. And so, it began that conversation again for a bunch of people to say, you know, what could I do? What could I tolerate? What would I accept in terms of risk and potential benefit? Dr Jones: Well, I think that's a great overview of a disorder where, you know, I think the neurologist's role is really indispensable. Right? I mean, you have to have this conversation not just once, this is a conversation that you have over time. And again, I really want to refer our listeners to this article. It's just a fantastic overview of a common disorder, but one where I think there are probably gaps where we can improve care. And Dr Shih, I want to thank you for joining us, and thank you for such a great discussion on essential tremor. I learned a lot from your article, and I learned even more from the interview today. I suspect our readers and listeners will too. Dr Shih: Well, thank you again for the invitation and the opportunity to kind of spread the word on this really common condition. Dr Jones: Again, we've been speaking with Dr Ludy Shih, author of a fantastic article on essential tremor in Continuum's latest issue on movement disorders. Please check it out, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.

When we think of cancer, we commonly think about the predominant ones…like breast, prostate, and lung. We don't often think about cancers found above the collarbone…such as throat, nose, and mouth. Dr. Scharukh Jalisi, Chief of Head and Neck Surgery at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, was in to chat with Dan about cancers that develop above the neck.You can hear NightSide with Dan Rea, Live! Weeknights From 8PM-12AM on WBZ - Boston's News Radio.

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about!Head and Neck Cancers that are not as well known… Dr. Scharukh Jalisi - Chief of Otolaryngology (ENT)/Head and Neck Surgery at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center checked in.“Dirty Soda”, the latest viral drink craze! What is it? Kyle Bray – WBZ NewsRadio Reporter explained it to Dan.13th annual Swim Across America Nantucket open water swim is Saturday, July 26, at Jetties Beach on Nantucket! Natalie Thompson – Swimmer/participant - a schoolteacher whose wife was diagnosed with ocular melanoma in 2019 stopped by.Temps Raise in Greater Boston again hitting 90s as we get closer to the weekend. AccuWeather Meteorologist Brian Thompson had the details.

You have probably seen recent headlines that Microsoft has developed an AI model that is 4x more accurate than humans at difficult diagnoses. It's been published everywhere, AI is 80% accurate compared to a measly 20% human rate, and AI was cheaper too! Does this signal the end of the human physician? Is the title nothing more than clickbait? Or is the truth somewhere in-between? Join Behind the Knife fellow Ayman Ali and Dr. Adam Rodman from Beth Israel Deaconess/Harvard Medical School to discuss what this study means for our future.       Studies: Sequential Diagnosis with Large Language Models: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.22405v1 METR study: https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-os-dev-study/ Hosts: Ayman Ali, MD Ayman Ali is a Behind the Knife fellow and general surgery PGY-4 at Duke Hospital in his academic development time where he focuses on applications of data science and artificial intelligence to surgery.  Adam Rodman, MD, MPH, FACP, @AdamRodmanMD Dr. Rodman is an Assistant Professor and a practicing hospitalist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. He's the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Director of AI Programs. In addition, he's the co-director of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center iMED Initiative. Podcast Link: http://bedside-rounds.org/ Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.   If you liked this episode, check out our recent episodes here: https://app.behindtheknife.org/listen

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain are joined by Dr. Deepa Rangachari, a thoracic medical oncologist and fellowship program director at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Together, they dived deep into the treatment algorithms for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a focus on curative intent. Key topics discussed include: •⁠  ⁠The importance of staging and lymph node evaluation in treatment planning. •⁠  ⁠The role of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and the impact of recent trial data, including the CHECKMATE 816 trial. •⁠  ⁠The significance of actionable mutations and the use of targeted therapies like Osimertinib and Alectinib. •⁠  ⁠The evolving role of ctDNA in treatment decisions and monitoring. •⁠  ⁠Insights into the management of side effects associated with Osimertinib and Alectinib. •⁠  ⁠The standard of care for unresectable stage 3 NSCLC, including concurrent chemoradiation and the use of Durvalumab. Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Join us for an informative discussion that highlights the latest advancements in lung cancer treatment and the importance of personalized care. Don't forget to check out our other episodes in the lung cancer treatment algorithm series!

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Charlotte Blease is an interdisciplinary health researcher at the Department of Women's and Children's Health at Uppsala University, Sweden, and the Digital Psychiatry Division at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center at the Harvard Medical School. She is a former Fulbright Scholar and a winner in 2012 of the UK-wide BBC Radio 3's New Generation Thinkers Competition. Dr. Blease has written extensively about the ethics of placebo and nocebo effects. Her research has been profiled by international news outlets including The Washington Post, The Guardian, and The Sydney Morning Herald. She is coauthor of The Nocebo Effect: When Words Make You Sick. In this episode, we focus on The Nocebo Effect. We start by talking about the placebo effect and the nocebo effect. We discuss how the nocebo effect is produced psychologically, whether it is “all in the head”, how it is produced in a clinical context, how to distinguish between “real” side effects of treatments and nocebo effects, and whether words can produce harm. We also discuss whether psychotherapy is mostly placebo. Finally, we talk about the side effects and nocebo effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, nocebo effects in public health and medical ethics, and how to reduce the nocebo effect.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, ROBINROSWELL, AND KEITH RICHARDSON!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, AND BENJAMIN GELBART!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about!Journey Forward's 15th Annual Casino Night – Thursday May 22nd – Journey Forward is a non-profit dedicated to bettering lives of those with paralysis. Christopher Knight – Actor (The Brady Bunch) & Host of This Year's Casino Night joined Dan to discuss the event.What is a Michelin Star and what does it take to earn one? The Michelin Guide (a guide rating the best restaurants) is coming to Boston. Restaurants inspectors have been deployed to Boston this year. Will Gilson - Chef/Owner of Cambridge Street Hospitality Group stopped by.New clues point to why colorectal cancer is rising in young people. Trisha Pasricha - Ask a Doctor columnist for The Washington Post & instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School & directs the Institute for Gut-Brain Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center checked in with Dan.Patriot Week for Mass Fallen Heroes, a series of events honoring vets and Gold Star families leading up to Memorial Day. With Dan Magoon - Exec Director of Mass Fallen Heroes.Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio app and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!

Dr. Kelly Gwathmey interviews Dr. Corey Bacher from the University of Toronto, Dr. Charles Kassardjian from the University of Toronto, both in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We also have Dr. Ruple Laughlin from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, and Dr. Puspha Narayanswami from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. They will all be discussing recommendations for monitoring and managing glucocorticoid related systemic complications from the recently published: “International Consensus Guidance for the Management of Glucocorticoid Related Complications in Neuromuscular Disease."

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about!Trump extends TikTok ban deadline by 75 days - predictions for potential outcomes, what the impact(s) would be on brands, creators and consumers? With Scott Sutton - CEO of Later (a marketing brand)The Fate of the Generals: MacArthur, Wainwright, and the Epic Battle for the Philippines - details the story of two World War II generals who both received the Medal of Honor through contrasting means of leadership. With Jonathan Horn - author and former White House speechwriter for President George W. Bush.Follow-up on the First Robot Assisted Live Liver Plant at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Dr. Martin Dibs – a surgeon involved in Zeller's procedure and director of Beth Israel's living liver transplant program.THE GOLF 100: A Spirited Ranking of the Greatest Players of All Time. With Michael Arkush – Author & Sportswriter who contributes to the NY Times & WaPo.Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio app and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!

Living with IBS-C often means silently dealing with more than just constipation. From missing social events to navigating daily stress and anxiety, the emotional toll can feel overwhelming. In this eye-opening episode of the Gastro Girl Podcast, host Jacqueline Gaulin talks with Dr. Sarah Ballou, Director of GI Behavioral Health at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Ballou shares insights from her groundbreaking research on what IBS-C patients are willing to sacrifice for symptom relief—and why the answer often lies in the gut-brain connection. We also explore the power of multidisciplinary care in IBS-C management. For many patients, the best outcomes come from combining medications, nutrition strategies, and gut-brain behavioral therapy—a team-based approach that treats the whole person, not just the symptoms. Dr. Ballou explains how GI psychologists work alongside gastroenterologists, dietitians, and other specialists to create personalized care plans that help patients feel heard, supported, and empowered. Whether you're living with IBS-C or supporting someone who is, this episode offers real hope, expert guidance, and practical strategies for managing symptoms without giving up the things you love. Sponsored by Ardelyx.

This episode is sponsored by: Set For LifeSet for Life Insurance helps doctors safeguard their future with True Own Occupational Disability Insurance. A single injury or illness can change everything, but the best physicians plan ahead. Protect your income and secure your future before life makes the choice for you. Your career deserves protection—act now at https://www.doctorpodcastnetwork.co/setforlife._______Curiosity isn't just a trait—it's a tool for better medicine. In this episode, Dr. Anthony Breu joins Dr. Bradley Block to explore how asking "why" transforms medical practice and patient care.They discuss the origins of the Curious Clinicians Podcast, born from social media "why" questions during the COVID era, and how it evolved into a platform for uncovering medical mysteries. Dr. Brau shares mind-blowing insights from the show like why elephants rarely get cancer, how furosemide works beyond diuresis, and the potential for oral insulin to revolutionize diabetes care. The conversation also covers practical takeaways, such as rethinking elevated lactate assumptions and wearing goggles to chop onions tear-free.With a mix of humor, science, and real-world applications, this episode is a masterclass in staying curious, challenging dogma, and bringing fresh perspectives to medicine—both in and out of the exam room.Three Actionable Takeaways:Stay Curious to Stay Sharp: Ask "why" about the things you see daily—whether it's a patient's response to meds or a biological oddity—to deepen your understanding and improve care.Challenge Medical Assumptions: Don't assume elevated lactate means hypoperfusion—consider beta-2 agonists like albuterol as a cause to avoid unnecessary treatments.Apply Podcast Lessons to Life: From wearing contacts to cutting onions without crying to appreciating furosemide's vasodilatory effects, small insights can enhance both personal and professional practice.About the Show:The Physician's Guide to Doctoring covers patient interactions, burnout, career growth, personal finance, and more. If you're tired of dull medical lectures, tune in for real-world lessons we should have learned in med school!About the Guest:Dr. Anthony Breu is the Director of Resident Education at VA Boston Healthcare System and an Assistant Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. A board-certified internist and hospitalist, he co-hosts the Curious Clinicians Podcast. With a BA in Bioethics and MD from Brown University, Dr. Breu trained at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. His interests include medical education, clinical reasoning, and tackling intriguing medical mysteries.Website and Podcast:https://www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/profile/anthony-breu/https://curiousclinicians.com/About the Host:Dr. Bradley Block is a board-certified otolaryngologist at ENT and Allergy Associates in Garden City, NY. He specializes in adult and pediatric ENT with interests in sinusitis and obstructive sleep apnea. Dr. Block also hosts the Physician's Guide to Doctoring podcast, focusing on personal and professional development for physicians.Want to be a guest? Email Brad at brad@physiciansguidetodoctoring.com or visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to learn more!Socials:● @physiciansguidetodoctoring on Facebook● @physicianguidetodoctoring on YouTube● @physiciansguide on Instagram and Twitter   Visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to connect, dive deeper, and keep the conversation going. Let's grow! Disclaimer:This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical, financial, or legal advice. Always consult a qualified professional for personalized guidance.

Medication safety remains a cornerstone of anesthesia practice with complex environments and high-stakes decisions requiring vigilant attention to prevent errors. This collaboration between APSF and OpenAnesthesia spotlights critical aspects of perioperative drug safety with practical insights from Dr. Juan Li, a cardiothoracic anesthesia fellow at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.• Perioperative anaphylaxis requires immediate recognition of cardiovascular, respiratory, and cutaneous manifestations• Neuromuscular blocking agents and antibiotics represent common triggers for anaphylactic reactions• Preoperative assessment must include thorough allergy history, medication reconciliation, and identification of drug-drug interactions• Standardized drug concentrations, preparation methods, and equipment minimize medication errors• Technology integration through barcode readers and computerized decision support enhances safety• Pharmacy support with pre-mixed solutions and pre-filled syringes reduces preparation errors• Post-operative monitoring remains critical for catching delayed medication reactions• Safety culture should emphasize root cause analysis rather than punishment for medication errors• Implementation of standard protocols is essential for managing new medications with limited safety dataVisit APSF.org and Openanesthesia.org for detailed information and resources on medication safety in anesthesia practice.

Bioadhesive materials have the potential to support patient care in a number of ways, from wound healing to repairing the dura to assisting with leaks of cerebral spinal fluid. In this follow-up to our 2022 interview, Ben Freedman, PhD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, shares technological advancements and discoveries made by his team over the past three years. Transcript: https://bit.ly/42btErk

Dr. Aditi Nerurkar is a Harvard physician, nationally recognized stress expert, and author of “The 5 Resets: Rewire Your Brain and Body For Less Stress and More.” She is also an in-demand multi-media personality, high profile medical correspondent, internationally renowned Fortune50 speaker, and podcaster. Uniquely fulfilling her original career ambition to be a journalist, Dr. Nerurkar has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Oprah Magazine, Architectural Digest and Elle – in addition to being a columnist for Forbes and writing for The Atlantic. She has made more than 300 appearances as a medical commentator on MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS News; and has spoken at the “Forbes 30 Under 30 Summit” and Harvard Business School Women's Conference. Dr. Nerurkar also co-hosts the popular and influential “Time Out: A Fair Play Podcast” with New York Times best-selling author Eve Rodsky. Dr. Nerurkar's first brush with intense media demand came in 2011 – when she was a Research Fellow at Harvard – with the publication of a study she conducted in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) titled: “When Conventional Medical Providers Recommend Unconventional Medicine”; followed by her first interview with Diane Sawyer on World News Tonight, and attention from NPR.Dr. Nerurkar's expertise on stress comes from working with thousands of patients throughout her years as a primary care physician and director of an integrative medicine program at Harvard's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, from 2012-2020. She is now a lecturer at Harvard Medical School in the Division of Global Health & Social Medicine and serves as the Co-Director of the Clinical Clerkship in Community Engagement. She has also worked in global public health at a World Health Organization collaboration center in Geneva, Switzerland. Though she entered Barnard College at Columbia University with an eye toward studying journalism, Dr. Nerurkar's family DNA all but dictated a future in medicine. In India, her grandfather was a surgeon and her grandmother, one of only three women in her medical school, was an OB/GYN. She was raised by her grandparents in Mumbai until the age of six while her parents were in the U.S. studying medicine themselves. She then came to the States, where she grew up outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  Even as she thrived as a researcher and practicing physician, she developed a love for media and health communication and knew she would eventually use her creative and journalistic talents to facilitate action. Her first published article in The Huffington Post, “Medication or Meditation: Which Should You Choose?” launched this side of her career. During the pandemic, her speaking career took off as a speaker with The Leigh Bureau Speaking Agency.  Topics covered in this episode:Food choices and HealthImportance of SleepMindfulness and MeditationDigital Detox and Social MediaExercise Building ResiliencePersonal Well-Being JourneyHabits for a Healthy LifeSelf-CareStrategies for Stress ReliefBalancing Information ConsumptionCultivating Self-CompassionOvercoming BurnoutHuman Connection and StressReferenced in the episode:The Lindsey Elmore Show Ep 216 | Pulling Back The Curtain: How Medicine is Really Practiced in the U.S. | Otis BrawleyTo learn more about Dr. Aditi Nerurkar and her work, head over to https://www.draditi.com/____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________We hope you enjoyed this episode. Come check us out at https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-lindsey-elmore-showBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-lindsey-elmore-show--5952903/support.

On today's episode of The Wholesome Fertility Podcast, I am joined by the incredible Dr. Alice Domar, a pioneer in the field of mind-body medicine and a leader in reproductive health psychology. Dr. Domar shares insights from her decades of research and work with patients experiencing infertility, diving deep into the emotional and physical toll of fertility challenges and how stress can impact reproductive outcomes. We discuss the groundbreaking research that links stress reduction to increased fertility success rates, the importance of patient-centered care, and how mind-body practices can transform the fertility journey. Dr. Domar also shares her thoughts on spirituality, the power of connection, and how fostering a sense of belonging can help patients navigate the emotional rollercoaster of infertility. This episode is packed with valuable insights and hope for anyone on the fertility journey. Be sure to tune in as you won't want to miss this eye-opening and inspiring conversation! Key takeaways: Stress significantly impacts reproductive outcomes, and reducing stress can improve success rates in fertility treatments. Research shows infertility patients often experience anxiety and depression levels similar to those with major illnesses like cancer or heart disease. The brain and body are constantly connected, and managing stress through mind-body strategies can positively influence fertility. Connecting with spirituality or a higher power can help individuals cope with the emotional challenges of infertility. Isolation is common for those facing infertility, but connecting with support groups or programs can provide invaluable relief and healing. Cutting-edge research using physiological devices to measure stress in real-time may revolutionize how stress is addressed during fertility treatments. Empathy, connection, and compassionate care are essential for improving the patient experience and outcomes. Guest Bio: Alice “Ali” Domar, Ph.D. is a pioneer in mind-body medicine, focusing on the relationship between stress, medical conditions, and lifestyle habits. She is Chief Compassion Officer at Inception Fertility, part-time associate professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior staff psychologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Dr. Domar is the author of Conquering Infertility and Finding Calm for the Expectant Mom and serves on advisory boards for Parents Magazine, Resolve, and Easy Eats. Her work has been featured in Redbook, Health, and BeWell.com. Websites/Social Media Links: https://www.instagram.com/inceptionfertility/ https://inceptionfertility.com/about-us/our-team/ https://www.preludefertility.com/  

Are you worried about whether your teen is just moody or actually struggling with depression? Do you wonder how much of their emotional ups and downs are connected to digital media? In this episode of Power Your Parenting: Moms with Teens, host Colleen O'Grady sits down with Dr. Meredith Gansner, a child psychiatrist and researcher, to discuss the rising rates of teen depression in the digital age. Together, they explore how social media, online interactions, and excessive screen time contribute to adolescent mental health struggles. Dr. Gansner shares insights from her research and her new book, Teen Depression Gone Viral, highlighting how parents can recognize signs of depression, differentiate between typical teen emotions and clinical concerns, and take proactive steps to support their child's well-being. They also tackle the difficult topic of suicidal ideation, how parents can navigate these conversations, and the importance of maintaining open communication while setting digital boundaries. Dr. Meredith Gansner is an instructor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and attending child psychiatrist at Boston Children's Hospital. After completing medical school at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, she completed her psychiatry residency at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Brigham and Women's Hospital and a fellowship in child psychiatry at Cambridge Health Alliance. Her research explores high-risk digital media use in adolescents and managing high-risk digital media habits. She is an active member of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry media committee, has written articles about mental health and digital media for The Psychiatric Times,The Boston Globe, and Slate magazine. Key takeaways from this conversation include the importance of observing your teen's level of functioning rather than just their emotions, understanding that social media is not inherently harmful but can be risky without guidance, and remembering that parents need support too—caring for yourself helps you better support your teen. With expert advice and practical strategies, this episode empowers moms to feel more prepared to guide their teens through the challenges of growing up in a digital world. Learn more about Dr. Gansner at https://www.childrenshospital.org/directory/meredith-gansner Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode, recorded live at the Becker's Healthcare 12th Annual CEO + CFO Roundtable features Ruben Azocar, VP for Perioperative Services at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Here, he shares his perspectives on addressing cybersecurity risks, leveraging artificial intelligence for operational efficiency, and tackling financial challenges in healthcare. He discusses strategies for improving patient care while managing costs, and how AI can support the revenue cycle and enhance the use of operating rooms.In collaboration with R1.

Join us for an empowering and insightful conversation as Dr. Jennie Berkovich sits down with Dr. Amy Comander, a leading breast oncologist and advocate for patient-centered care. In this episode, Dr. Comander shares her expertise on the latest advancements in breast cancer detection, treatment, and survivorship. Discover how personalized medicine and multidisciplinary care are revolutionizing outcomes for breast cancer patients. Dr. Comander also delves into the critical role of lifestyle medicine—including exercise, nutrition, and mindfulness—in promoting healing and resilience. With her unique perspective as a passionate runner and physician, Dr. Comander draws inspiring parallels between running and the cancer journey, offering hope and practical advice for patients and their families navigating a diagnosis. Whether you're a healthcare professional, patient, or advocate, this episode will leave you informed, inspired, and ready to run the race toward better cancer care. Don't miss it! Dr. Amy Comander specializes in the care of women with breast cancer.  Dr. Comander is Medical Director of the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham, where she also serves as Director of Breast Oncology and Cancer Survivorship at the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham and at Newton Wellesley Hospital. She is an Instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. She received her undergraduate degree and a master's degree in Neuroscience at Harvard University. She received her medical degree at Yale University School of Medicine. She completed her Internal Medicine residency training and Hematology-Oncology fellowship training at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School. She is board certified in Hematology and Medical Oncology, and she is a Diplomat of the American Board of Lifestyle Medicine. _________________________________________________ Sponsor the JOWMA Podcast! Email digitalcontent@jowma.org Become a JOWMA Member! www.jowma.org Follow us on Instagram! www.instagram.com/JOWMA_org Follow us on Twitter! www.twitter.com/JOWMA_med Follow us on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/JOWMAorg Stay up-to-date with JOWMA news! Sign up for the JOWMA newsletter! https://jowma.us6.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=9b4e9beb287874f9dc7f80289&id=ea3ef44644&mc_cid=dfb442d2a7&mc_eid=e9eee6e41e

In this episode, podcast hosts Dr. Josh Roshal, Dr. Darian Hoagland, and Dr. Maya Hunt discuss the ins and outs of professional development time (PDT) and professional identity formation (PIF) during surgical training. Joined by insights from fellow CoSEF members, the team dives into key topics such as mentorship, timing, and making the most of this critical phase in residency. From rapid-fire tips to personal reflections, this episode offers a wealth of advice for trainees considering their PDT and PIF.. Episode Hosts: –Dr. Josh Roshal, University of Texas Medical Branch, @Joshua_Roshal, jaroshal@utmb.edu –Dr. Darian Hoagland, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, @DHoaglandMD, dlhoagla@bidmc.harvard.edu –Dr. Maya Hunt, Indiana University, @dr_mayathehunt, mayahunt@iu.edu –CoSEF: @surgedfellows, cosef.org Guests:  -Dr. Ariana Naaseh, Washington University in St. Louis, @ariananaaseh, a.naaseh@wustl.edu -Dr. Colleen McDermott, University of Utah, @ColleenMcDMD, Colleen.McDermott@hsc.utah.edu -Dr. Shahnur Ahmed, Indiana University, shahme@iu.edu -Dr. Xinyi “Cathy” Luo, Tulane University, @DoctorSoySauce, xluo@tulane.edu -Dr. Ananya Anand, Stanford University, @AnanyaAnandMD, aa24@stanford.edu References: Smith SM, Chugh PV, Song C, Kim K, Whang E, Kristo G. Perspectives of Surgical Research Residents on Improving Their Reentry Into Clinical Training. J Surg Educ. 2024 Nov;81(11):1491-1497. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.07.005. Epub 2024 Aug 31. PMID: 39217679. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39217679/ Kochis MA, Cron DC, Coe TM, Secor JD, Guyer RA, Brownlee SA, Carney K, Mullen JT, Lillemoe KD, Liao EC, Boland GM. Implementation and Evaluation of an Academic Development Rotation for Surgery Residents. J Surg Educ. 2024 Nov;81(11):1748-1755. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.08.015. Epub 2024 Sep 23. PMID: 39317122. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39317122/ Gkiousias V. Scalpel Please! A Scoping Review Dissecting the Factors and Influences on Professional Identity Development of Trainees Within Surgical Programs. Cureus. 2021;13(12):e20105. doi:10.7759/cureus.20105 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35003955/ Rivard SJ, Vitous CA, De Roo AC, et al. “The captain of the ship.” A qualitative investigation of surgeon identity formation. Am J Surg. 2022;224(1 Pt B):284-291. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.01.010 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35168761/ Irby DM, Cooke M, O'Brien BC. Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: 1910 and 2010. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2010;85(2):220-227. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c88449 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20107346/ Veazey Brooks J, Bosk CL. Remaking surgical socialization: work hour restrictions, rites of passage, and occupational identity. Soc Sci Med 1982. 2012;75(9):1625-1632.doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.07.007 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22863331/ Cruess RL, Cruess SR, Boudreau JD, Snell L, Steinert Y. A schematic representation of the professional identity formation and socialization of medical students and residents: a guide for medical educators. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll.2015;90(6):718-725.doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000700 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25785682/ Huffman EM, Anderson TN, Choi JN, Smith BK. Why the Lab? What is Really Motivating General Surgery Residents to Take Time for Dedicated Research. J SurgEduc.2020;77(6):e39-e46.doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.07.034 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32768383/ Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.  

Send us a textIn this episode, Ben and Daphna speak with Dr. Stephen Pearlman, Clinical Effectiveness Officer at ChristianaCare and Professor of Pediatrics at Thomas Jefferson University, and Dr. Munish Gupta, Director of Quality Improvement in Neonatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Assistant Professor at Harvard. Together, they reflect on leading the Quality Improvement (QI) Day at Hot Topics in Neonatology. They discuss integrating data, AI, and family-centered care into QI, practical strategies for engaging teams, and the importance of collaboration and international perspectives in neonatal QI. This conversation highlights actionable insights to improve neonatal care.As always, feel free to send us questions, comments, or suggestions to our email: nicupodcast@gmail.com. You can also contact the show through Instagram or Twitter, @nicupodcast. Or contact Ben and Daphna directly via their Twitter profiles: @drnicu and @doctordaphnamd. The papers discussed in today's episode are listed and timestamped on the webpage linked below. Enjoy!

This week, President-elect Donald Trump picked Brendan Carr to be the next chairman of the F.C.C. We talk with The Verge's editor in chief, Nilay Patel, about what this could mean for the future of the internet, and for free speech at large. Then, a new study found that ChatGPT defeated doctors at diagnosing some diseases. One of the study's authors, Dr. Adam Rodman, joins us to discuss the future of medicine. And finally, court is back in session. It's time for the Hard Fork Crimes Division. One more thing: We want to learn more about you, our listeners. Please fill out our quick survey: nytimes.com/hardforksurvey. Guests:Nilay Patel, co-founder of The Verge and host of the podcasts Decoder and The Vergecast.Adam Rodman, internal medicine physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and one of the co-authors of a recent study testing the effectiveness of ChatGPT to diagnose illnesses. Additional Reading:Trump Picks Brendan Carr to Lead F.C.C.A.I. Chatbots Defeated Doctors at Diagnosing IllnessGary Wang, a Top FTX Executive, Is Given No Prison Time We want to hear from you. Email us at hardfork@nytimes.com. Find “Hard Fork” on YouTube and TikTok. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

In this episode, podcast hosts Dr. Josh Roshal, Dr. Darian Hoagland, and Dr. Maya Hunt dive into two important papers that provide guidance on navigating the hidden curriculum of the surgical residency match process. Joined by fellow CoSEF members Dr. Ariana Naaseh and Dr. John Woodward, the discussion revolves around practical tips for finding your perfect surgical residency and filtering out the noise during the application process. Journal Club Hosts: –Dr. Josh Roshal, University of Texas Medical Branch, @Joshua_Roshal, jaroshal@utmb.edu –Dr. Darian Hoagland, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, @DHoaglandMD, dlhoagla@bidmc.harvard.edu –Dr. Maya Hunt, Indiana University, @dr_mayathehunt, mayahunt@iu.edu –CoSEF: @surgedfellows, cosef.org Journal Club Authors:  -Dr. Ariana Naaseh, Washington University in St. Louis, @ariananaaseh, a.naaseh@wustl.edu -Dr. John Woodwad, University at Buffalo, @JohnWoodward76, jmwoodwa@buffalo.edu Medical Students:  -Rachel Kalbfell (MS4), Washington University in St. Louis, @rachelkalbfell,  rkalbfell@wustl.edu -Keith Makhecha (MS4), Indiana University, kmakhech@iu.edu References: 1.    Woodward JM, Lund S, Brian R, Anand A, Moreci R, Navarro SM, Zarate Rodriguez J, Naaseh A, Tate K, Roshal J, Silvestri C, Gan CY, Sathe T, Thornton SW, Cloonan M, Weaver L, Oh MH, Godley F, L'Huillier JC. Find Your Perfect Match for Surgical Residency: Six Steps to Building Your BRANDD from the Collaboration of Surgical Education Fellows. Annals of Surgery. 2024;5(3). doi:10.1097/AS9.0000000000000466. 2.    Naaseh A, Roshal J, Silvestri C, Woodward JM, Thornton SW, L'Huillier JC, Hunt M, Sathe TS, Hoagland DL, Godley F IV, Jindani R, Tieken KR, Rodriguez JGZ, Anand A, Chen JH, Navarro SM, Lund S. Filter Out the Noise: How to Narrow Your Search for the Perfect Match by the Collaboration of Surgical Education Fellows (CoSEF). Journal of Surgical Education. 2024;81(10):1394-1399. doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.07.010 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39178489/ Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.