DSDeanna N. Schreiber-Gregory

Deanna N. Schreiber-Gregory

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Deanna N. Schreiber-Gregory has a total of 32 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Correlates of Unmet Need for Modern Contraception Among Reproductive-Aged Women Involved in New York City Criminal Legal Systems

    by Melissa N. Slavin, Brooke S. West, Deanna Schreiber-Gregory, Frances R. Levin, Gina Wingood, Steve Martino, Golfo Tzilos Wernette, Chermaine Black, Nabila El-Bassel

    Introduction: The population of women involved in criminal legal systems (WICL), a majority of whom are reproductive-aged, has risen steadily in the United States. They contend with numerous barriers to sexual and reproductive health services resulting in high rates of unmet need for contraception and unintended pregnancy. Materials and Methods: This study included 132 non-pregnancy seeking reproductive-aged WICL enrolled in the baseline assessment of the HIV prevention intervention, “Women on the Road to Health” (WORTH). A multivariate generalized linear logistic regression model with robust estimation examined effects of past 6-month intimate partner violence (IPV; sexual and physical/injurious), past 3-month substance use (binge drinking, cannabis, other illegal drug use), and lifetime mental health diagnoses (anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder) on women's unmet need for modern contraception, adjusting for significant demographic and socioeconomic factors. Results: Women who were younger in age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–0.88) and reporting lifetime diagnoses of anxiety disorders (OR: 13.64; 95% CI: 2.71–68.34) were significantly more likely to meet the criteria for unmet need for modern contraception. Women with a regular gynecologist (OR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.01–0.86) reporting lifetime diagnoses of bipolar disorder and past 6-month sexual IPV histories (OR: 0.04; 95% CI: 0.002–0.86) were significantly less likely to meet the criteria for unmet need for modern contraception. Conclusions: Distinct mental health diagnoses and experiences of IPV may uniquely impact unmet need for modern contraception among WICL. These findings emphasize the need for a more nuanced comprehension of these relationships to deliver comprehensive and holistic health services that address the intersecting needs of this population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01784809. Registered 6 February 2013.


  • Extending growth curves: a trajectory monitoring approach to identification and interventions in struggling medical student learners

    by Ryan R. Landoll, Layne D. Bennion, Ashley M. Maranich, Paul A. Hemmer, Dario Torre, Deanna N. Schreiber-Gregory, Steven J. Durning, Ting Dong

    Given gaps in both identifying and providing targeted interventions to struggling learners, the purpose of this study is to both improve rapid identification and to improve individualized academic advising for learners using this visual representation of performance. Across three graduating classes, individual growth curves were calculated for each student on National Board of Medical Examiners customized assessments during the pre-clerkship period using their deviation from the class average at each assessment point. These deviation scores were cumulatively summed over time and were regressed onto the sequence of exams. We analyzed the difference between the regression slopes of those students placed on Academic Probation (AP) versus not, as well as differences in slopes based on the timing of when a struggling learner was placed on AP to explore learner trajectory after identification. Students on AP had an average growth slope of − 6.06 compared to + 0.89 for those not on AP. Findings also suggested that students who were placed on AP early during pre-clerkship showed significant improvement (positive changes in trajectory) compared to students identified later in the curriculum. Our findings suggest that earlier academic probation and intervention with struggling learners may have a positive effect on academic trajectory. Future research can better explore how academic trajectory monitoring and performance review can be regularly used in advising sessions with students.


  • Open Access

    When will I get my paper back? A replication study of publication timelines for health professions education research

    by Lauren A. Maggio, William E. Bynum Iv, Deanna N. Schreiber-Gregory, Steven J. Durning, Anthony R. Artino Jr.

    Introduction Biomedical researchers have lamented the lengthy timelines from manuscript submission to publication and highlighted potential detrimental effects on scientific progress and scientists’ careers. In 2015, Himmelstein identified the mean time from manuscript submission to acceptance in biomedicine as approximately 100 days. The length of publication timelines in health professions education (HPE) is currently unknown. Methods This study replicates Himmelstein’s work with a sample of 14 HPE journals published between 2008–2018. Using PubMed, 19,182 article citations were retrieved. Open metadata for each were downloaded, including the date the article was received by the journal, date the authors resubmitted revisions, date the journal accepted the article, and date of entry into PubMed. Journals without publication history metadata were excluded. Results Publication history data were available for 55% (n = 8) of the journals sampled. The publication histories of 4,735 (25%) articles were analyzed. Mean time from: (1) author submission to journal acceptance was 180.93 days (SD = 103.89), (2) author submission to posting on PubMed was 263.55 days (SD = 157.61), and (3) journal acceptance to posting on PubMed was 83.15 days (SD = 135.72). Discussion This study presents publication metadata for journals that openly provide it—a first step towards understanding publication timelines in HPE. Findings confirm the replicability of the original study, and the limited data suggest that, in comparison to biomedical scientists broadly, medical educators may experience longer wait times for article acceptance and publication.


  • Open Access

    When will I get my paper back? A replication study of publication timelines for health professions education research

    by Lauren A. Maggio, William E. Bynum, Deanna N. Schreiber-Gregory, Steven J. Durning, Anthony R. Artino

    Biomedical researchers have lamented the lengthy timelines from manuscript submission to publication and highlighted potential detrimental effects on scientific progress and scientists’ careers. In 2015, Himmelstein identified the mean time from manuscript submission to acceptance in biomedicine as approximately 100 days. The length of publication timelines in health professions education (HPE) is currently unknown. This study replicates Himmelstein’s work with a sample of 14 HPE journals published between 2008-2018. Using PubMed, 19,182 article citations were retrieved. Open metadata for each was downloaded, including the date the article was received by the journal, the date the authors resubmitted revisions, the date the journal accepted the article, and date of entry into PubMed. Journals without publication history metadata were excluded. Publication history data was available for 55% (n=8) of the journals sampled. The publication histories of 4,735 (25%) articles were analyzed. Mean time from: (1) author submission to journal acceptance was 180.93 days (SD=103.89), (2) author submission to posting on PubMed was 263.55 days (SD=157.61), and (3) journal acceptance to posting on PubMed was 83.15 days (SD=135.72). This study presents publication metadata for journals that openly provide it—a first step towards understanding publication timelines in HPE. Findings confirm the replicability of the original study, and the limited data suggest that, in comparison to biomedical scientists broadly, medical educators may experience longer wait times for article acceptance and publication. Reasons for these delays are currently unknown and deserve further study; such work would be facilitated by increased public access to journal metadata. What this article adds: Publication delays can negatively impact science and researchers’ careers. A previous study, in biomedicine, leveraged publicly available data to identify a 100-day waiting period between manuscript submission and acceptance. However, this study provides limited information on timelines for health professions education (HPE) articles. Thus, the current study replicates the original investigation with publication timeline data for eight HPE journals, which make their data publicly accessible, finding the mean time from submission to acceptance to be 181 days. Reasons for these delays are currently unknown and deserve further study; such work would be facilitated by increased public access to journal metadata.

  • The relationship between weight stigma, weight bias internalization, and physical health in military personnel with or at high-risk of overweight/obesity

    by Lisa M. Shank, Natasha A. Schvey, Kendra Ekundayo, Deanna Schreiber-Gregory, Dawn Bates, Douglas Maurer, Elena Spieker, Mark Stephens, Marian Tanofsky-Kraff, Tracy Sbrocco


  • Open Access

    Untying the Gordian knot: remediation problems in medical schools that need remediation

    by Layne D. Bennion, Steven J. Durning, Jeffrey LaRochelle, Michelle Yoon, Deanna Schreiber-Gregory, Brian V. Reamy, Dario Torre

    This position paper discusses on-going academic remediation challenges within the field of medical education. More specifically, we identify three common contemporary problems and propose four recommendations to strengthen remediation efforts. Selecting or determining what type of remediation is needed for a particular student is akin to analyzing a Gordian knot with individual, institutional and systemic contributors. More emphasis, including multi-institutional projects and research funding is needed. Recommendations regarding language use and marketing of such programs are given.