C. Jessica Dine
· M.D.VerifiedUniversity of Pennsylvania · Rehabilitation Medicine
Active 2007–2025
About
C. Jessica Dine, M.D., is a Professor of Medicine specializing in Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. She is also a Fellow at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Dine serves as Co-Director of the Measey Medical Education Fellowship at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and holds the position of Associate Dean of Assessment, Evaluation, and Medical Education Research at the Perelman School of Medicine. Her educational background includes a B.S. in Chemistry from Haverford College, an M.D. from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, and an M.S.H.P. in Health Services and Policy Research from the University of Pennsylvania. Her research focuses on medical education, development of evaluations, understanding and measuring resource utilization, physician practice patterns, and clinical leadership. She is actively involved in educational assessment and innovation, contributing to the development of AI tools for medical education and exploring learner engagement and feedback in medical training.
Research topics
- Medical education
- Pedagogy
- Psychology
- Political Science
- Computer Science
- Medicine
- Management
- Nursing
Selected publications
Academic Medicine · 2025-05-30
articleSenior authorBMC Medical Education · 2025-05-22 · 2 citations
articleOpen accessSenior authorBACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the various models of student representation in curriculum development across medical schools in the United States, based on the participatory governance theory. Recognizing the critical role of student feedback in enhancing medical education, the work sought to assess the diversity of student representation models, identify key elements that contribute to effective student involvement, and evaluate the potential impact on curriculum outcomes. METHODS: An initial list of 166 allopathic MD schools was curated from the AAMC Medical Schools Admission Requirements website. Schools were selected based on the presence of information about student representation in curriculum design. This selection was refined through a Google search using specific search terms related to student representation, followed by an evaluation based on the amount and relevance of available information on each school's website. The methodology involved a detailed examination of the websites for selected schools, focusing on the structure and organization of student involvement in curriculum development. RESULTS: Of the initial 166 medical schools, 49 (29.7%) had publicly available information on student involvement in curriculum development. These schools were categorized into three main models of student representation: direct representation, feedback-driven, and hybrid models. The analysis revealed significant diversity in how student representation is implemented, with each model exhibiting unique strengths and limitations. Direct representation models were found to facilitate substantive student roles in decision-making, feedback-driven models excelled in rapidly integrating student feedback into curricular adjustments, and hybrid models combined aspects of both to provide a comprehensive approach to student involvement. CONCLUSIONS: There is no one-size-fits-all model for student representation in medical education. However, the hybrid model shows promise for its balanced approach to integrating student perspectives into curriculum development. Continuous evaluation and refinement of student representation models are essential for ensuring that medical education remains responsive to the needs of students and the evolving landscape of the medical field. This work underscores the importance of student feedback in medical education and advocates for further studies to quantify the impact of different models of student representation on educational outcomes and professional success.
Interprofessional Mechanical Ventilation Education for Critical Care Trainees: A Pilot Curriculum
ATS Scholar · 2025-08-01
articleOpen accessInequities in the National Clinical Assessment Tool for Medical Students in the Emergency Department
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2025-10-04
articleOpen accessINTRODUCTION: The National Clinical Assessment Tool for Emergency Medicine (NCAT-EM) was designed to standardize medical student assessments during emergency medicine clinical rotations. While multiple assessment tools implemented in medical education have been prone to inequities, it remains unknown how student and rater demographics impact NCAT-EM scores. In this study we examined how a student's gender and status as under-represented in medicine (URM) affected NCAT-EM scores. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all NCAT-EM assessments of clerkship medical students at a single institution in 2022. We performed mixed-effect ordinal logistic regression analyses to determine the association between the seven NCAT-EM domains (history/physical, prioritized differential, formulation of plans, observation/monitoring, emergency management, communication, and global assessment) and student gender, as well as the NCAT-EM domains and students' URM status (specifically in domains of race and ethnicity). We adjusted our analyses for the site of rotation, time, the rater's role (attending or resident), and rater demographics (gender, URM status). We then evaluated the interaction in gender concordance and URM-status concordance on outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1,881 NCAT-EM assessment forms were submitted on 142 students completed by 266 raters. There were no significant associations between student gender and NCAT-EM ratings across the seven domains. We found an association between URM students and lower scores in multiple NCAT-EM domains, including global assessment (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, CI 0.25-0.99, P = .01); history/physical (OR 0.38, CI 0.19-0.77, P = .01); and prioritized differential (OR 0.47, CI 0.26-0.88, P = .02). This effect was moderated by a significant positive interaction effect with URM concordance between raters and students in the prioritized differential and observation/monitoring domains. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to highlight differences in both gender and status as under-represented in medicine within the nationally implemented NCAT-EM assessment tool. Women students were overall rated similarly across the NCAT-EM domains compared to men, with no association of gender on ratings. However, students' URM status was associated with lower scores in multiple NCAT-EM domains. This finding was mitigated by URM concordance between faculty and resident raters. Our findings support the need for additional studies to understand bias and inequities in the application of the NCAT-EM tool nationally.
BMC Medical Education · 2025-07-01 · 5 citations
articleOpen accessSenior authorBACKGROUND: National organizations have identified incorporation of LGBTQ-health content into graduate medical education programs as key action items; however, there has been no systematic study of LGBTQ-health content in these programs using a unified survey instrument across all specialties. The primary objective of this study was therefore to systematically evaluate the quantity of LGBTQ-related didactic and clinical education in graduate medical education programs using a unified survey. METHODS: A cross-sectional, internet-based survey study of programs participating in the 2023-2024 Electronic Residency Application System, performed from September 2023-August 2024. RESULTS: Of 4,512 programs, 1,048 programs responded (23.2%). The median and mean number of didactic hours per year dedicated to LGBTQ-related content was 2.0 (IQR, 1.0-5.0, range, 0.0-200.0) and 4.0 (SD 9.1), respectively. The median and mean number of clinical hours per year dedicated to LGBTQ-related content was 10.0 (IQR, 1.5-40.0, range, 0.0-2000.0) and 61.0 (SD 188.4), respectively. Multiple programs reported that residents received no exposure to LGBTQ-related health content in either didactic settings (15.8%; 95% CI, 13.5-18.5%) or clinical settings (19.4%, CI 16.1 - 23.0%). The most covered didactic topics were gender identity (43.6%), sexual orientation (41.6%), and barriers to care (32.0%). The most covered clinical topics were Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (77.0%) and facial masculinization/feminization surgery (68.4%). The most cited barriers to including LGBTQ-related health topics were the lack of faculty with requisite knowledge/expertise (56.1%, CI 52.3 - 59.9%) and the lack of time (48.3%, CI 44.5 - 52.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple programs provide no didactic or clinical exposure to LGBTQ-related health topics, which does not align with the goals outlined by national organizations.
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025-10-01
articleBackground: Effective communication during consultations is essential for patient care and trainee education. However, variability in consult delivery can lead to unclear consult questions, missed teaching, and inefficiencies. We aimed to implement a structured model to improve consult clarity, communication and teaching during inpatient consultations. Methods: Participants included Internal Medicine residents and Nephrology fellows at Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in 2025.Verbal consults (in person or phone) were eligible. iRAPPORT was developed from literature review and informal needs assessment of house staff and faculty (figure 1). It was introduced at noon conference and displayed in housestaff workrooms. Post-intervention survey was distributed. The intervention lasted 1 month. Primary outcome was trainee perception of consult clarity and communication. Secondary outcome was perception of teaching points during consults. Results: Surveys were completed by 80% of fellows (n=4) and 20% of residents (n=7; 2 interns, 5 residents). Most agreed that iRAPPORT improved communication (73%), consult clarity (73%) and professionalism (73%). A majority (81%) planned to continue using it, and 73% found it feasible for daily use. While 75% of fellows reported increased teaching, only 28% of residents perceived increased teaching. Half of fellows and 57% of residents noted improved consult quality and initial workup. Residents valued the structure; fellows noted clearer questions and more complete workups. Barriers included interruptions, limited model awareness, and discomfort stating team roles. Conclusion: iRAPPORT was perceived as a useful tool to enhance consult clarity and communication. Its impact on teaching was mixed, possibly limited by workload. Limitations included short duration, single site, small sample, low survey response rate and no pre-survey or adherence data. Future steps include evaluating patient safety impact, broader implementation, teaching workshops and epic integrating.iRAPPORT model
medRxiv · 2025-02-20
preprintOpen accessSenior authorAbstract Background National organizations have identified incorporation of LGBTQ-health content into graduate medical education programs as key action items; however, there has been no systematic study of LGBTQ-health content in these programs. Objective The primary objective of this study was to systematically evaluate the quantity of LGBTQ-related didactic and clinical education in graduate medical education programs. Methods A cross-sectional, internet-based survey study of programs participating in the 2023-2024 Electronic Residency Application System, performed from September 2023-August 2024. Results Of 4,512 programs, 1,048 programs responded (23.2%). The median and mean number of didactic hours per year dedicated to LGBTQ-related content was 2.0 (IQR, 1.0–5.0, range, 0.0-200.0) and 4.0 (SD 9.1), respectively. The median and mean number of clinical hours per year dedicated to LGBTQ-related content was 10.0 (IQR, 1.5 – 40.0, range, 0.0 – 2000.0) and 61.0 (SD 188.4), respectively. Multiple programs reported that residents received no exposure to LGBTQ-related health content in either didactic settings (15.8%; 95% CI, 13.5%-18.5%) or clinical settings (19.4%, CI 16.1% – 23.0%). The most covered didactic topics were gender identity (43.6%), sexual orientation (41.6%), and barriers to care (32.0%). The most covered clinical topics were Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (77.0%) and facial masculinization/feminization surgery (68.4%). The most cited barriers to including LGBTQ-related health topics were the lack of faculty with requisite knowledge/expertise (56.1%, CI 52.3% – 59.9%) and the lack of time (48.3%, CI 44.5% – 52.1%). Conclusions Multiple programs provide no didactic or clinical exposure to LGBTQ-related health topics, which does not align with the goals outlined by national organizations.
Accuracy of Entrustment-Based Assessment: Implications for Programs and Patients.
PubMed · 2024-02-01 · 2 citations
articleOpen access1st authorCorrespondingParticipants underestimated residents' potential need for greater supervision. Overall agreement between raters and scripted scores were low.
Gender Differences in Work-Based Assessment Scores and Narrative Comments After Direct Observation
Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2024-01-30 · 5 citations
articleOpen accessSenior authorJournal of General Internal Medicine · 2024-08-21 · 1 citations
articleOpen access1st authorCorrespondingBACKGROUND: Institutions rely on student evaluations of teaching (SET) to ascertain teaching quality. Manual review of narrative comments can identify faculty with teaching concerns but can be resource and time-intensive. AIM: To determine if natural language processing (NLP) of SET comments completed by learners on clinical rotations can identify teaching quality concerns. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Single institution retrospective cohort analysis of SET (n = 11,850) from clinical rotations between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The performance of three NLP dictionaries created by the research team was compared to an off-the-shelf Sentiment Dictionary. PROGRAM EVALUATION: The Expert Dictionary had an accuracy of 0.90, a precision of 0.62, and a recall of 0.50. The Qualifier Dictionary had lower accuracy (0.65) and precision (0.16) but similar recall (0.67). The Text Mining Dictionary had an accuracy of 0.78 and a recall of 0.24. The Sentiment plus Qualifier Dictionary had good accuracy (0.86) and recall (0.77) with a precision of 0.37. DISCUSSION: NLP methods can identify teaching quality concerns with good accuracy and reasonable recall, but relatively low precision. An existing, free, NLP sentiment analysis dictionary can perform nearly as well as dictionaries requiring expert coding or manual creation.
Frequent coauthors
- 34 shared
Judy A. Shea
- 29 shared
Lisa M. Bellini
University of Pennsylvania
- 25 shared
Meeta Prasad Kerlin
University of Pennsylvania
- 20 shared
Dylan S. Small
- 20 shared
Jingsan Zhu
University of Pennsylvania
- 20 shared
Karen M. Warburton
- 20 shared
Eric Goren
University of Pennsylvania
- 20 shared
Mina S. Sedrak
City of Hope
Labs
C. Jessica Dine LaboratoryPI
Education
- 2009
M.S., Health Services and Policy Research
University of Pennsylvania
- 2002
M.D.
University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine
- 1998
B.S.
Haverford College
Awards & honors
- Fellow, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Univers…
- Resume-aware match score
- Save to shortlist
- AI-drafted outreach
See your match with C. Jessica Dine
PhdFit ranks faculty by your research interests, methods, and publications — grounded in their actual work, not templates.
- Free to start
- No credit card
- 30-second signup