A new study led by researchers at the School of Public Health compared long-term care systems across countries and exposed a troubling reality: one in five dementia patients worldwide receive no care at all.

“We found an alarming message that both developed and developing countries face common care deficits for dementia care,” said Yuting Qian GRD ’27, co-lead author of the study and doctoral candidate in health policy and management at Yale.

The researchers examined both formal care, provided by professional healthcare workers, and informal care, typically delivered by family members. The study uncovered stark variations in how nations structure their care systems, with European countries generally providing better formal support than the United States or China.

Much of the difference lies in how care is financed and delivered. In Denmark and the Netherlands, centralized systems funded by both federal and municipal governments offer comprehensive, formal support. These models have proven more effective at meeting the medical needs of their aging populations.

In contrast, the United States lacks a cohesive national approach to long-term care. Most older adults rely on a patchwork of Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance, with Medicare only covering care for a limited time after hospital discharge — typically up to 100 days.

As a result, the majority of Americans must either pay out-of-pocket, rely on family caregivers or go without necessary care. The study found approximately 86 percent of American dementia patients lack access to formal care services.

“In America, older adults have only limited coverage of long-term care through Medicare and Medicaid, while select wealthy individuals can buy commercial insurance,” said Xi Chen, senior author of the study and associate professor of public health at YSPH. “That makes the American system one of the worst among developed countries.”

The situation appears even more dire in nations like China, where formal care infrastructure for dementia patients is virtually nonexistent, with 99 percent of patients receiving no formal care services.

Socioeconomic factors play a significant role in determining who receives care. Those with fewer financial resources face greater barriers to accessing professional services, creating a cascade of challenges for both patients and their families. For caregivers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, providing care often means sacrificing income and employment, further straining already limited resources.

“Those who are less educated tend to lack access to formal care, which is important for those with dementia as they need highly skilled services,” said Zhuoer Lin, co-lead author and assistant professor of health policy and administration at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health. “If family members have to leave work because of caregiving responsibilities without financial support, a greater burden is placed on the family as a whole.”

Addressing these gaps will require significant policy changes. For the United States, Chen advocates for Medicare expansion to cover long-term care and more inclusive eligibility for Medicaid. Federal programs should also extend beyond short-term rehabilitation to address ongoing care needs.

The research also highlighted the potential of novel technologies to help address care deficits — though implementation challenges remain, particularly around patient preferences.

“Incorporating AI or robots in facilities like nursing homes could improve the care deficits,” said Qian. “But a majority of advanced technologies have been introduced in formal care settings, while most patients prefer aging at home in community settings.”

Regardless of new technologies, care systems across countries face sustainability challenges as populations age. Some European governments have begun shifting financial responsibility to local municipalities as costs rise, potentially threatening the centralized models that have proven most effective.

The research team aims to further their study by expanding their global dataset to include more developing nations. Through this ongoing work, they hope to identify sustainable solutions that can be adapted across more diverse healthcare systems and cultural contexts.

YSPH is located at 60 College St.

The post Yale study finds gaps in dementia care for older adults appeared first on Yale Daily News.

A new study, co-led by Yale researchers and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, or JAMA, found that high resolution micro-ultrasound, or microUS, is just as effective for guiding prostate cancer biopsies as MRI, or magnetic resonance imaging. 

The study was based on a randomized clinical trial with 678 participants. The researchers wanted to determine if high-resolution micro-ultrasonography-guided biopsy was better than MRI fusion-guided biopsy for detecting prostate cancer in a clinical setting. The study found that microUS was, in fact, a promising alternative to MRI.

“This is a game changer as MRI is a limited resource, with inadequate access globally. Even in the United States, only one-third of men have an MRI prior to biopsy, and this is decreased in the rural USA,” Dr. Adam Kinnaird, chair of prostate cancer research at the University of Alberta, told the News. “Micro-ultrasound can be used anywhere there is electricity and has the potential for reaching men at risk of prostate cancer worldwide.” 

Micro-ultrasound is an advanced ultrasound platform that utilizes 29 megahertz, or MHz, as opposed to the traditional ultrasound which performs at around seven to nine MHz. This makes the quality of the microUS more advanced, as it can assess glandular structure. 

Unlike MRI, which often requires multiple appointments and costly equipment, microUS enables clinicians to both scan and biopsy in a single session. This could streamline care and lower the barriers for patients, promoting equity in diagnosing prostate cancer in men. 

“Micro-ultrasound platform is less expensive than purchasing an MRI,” Dr. Joseph Renzulli, urologist at Yale, told the News. “The benefits of micro ultrasound are the ability to identify areas within the prostate that are concerning for potential prostate cancer and then targeting those areas with biopsy real time. This can all be done during one visit for the patient.”  

This shift from imaging-dependent referrals to point of care diagnostics led by urologists could lower costs dramatically in underserved and rural areas, shorten time to diagnosis in high-risk prostate cancer cases and reduce MRI bottlenecks in systems that are overburdened. 

The clinical trial took place across 20 centers in eight different countries, from December 2021 to September 2024, where each center did a noninferiority trial of biopsy-naive men. A noninferiority trial focuses on demonstrating that a new diagnostic tool, in this case microUS, is not worse than the current standard for detection, which in this case is MRI. This trial specifically worked with male patients who had never undergone a prostate biopsy but were being considered for one. The men were chosen based on elevated levels of prostate-specific antigen — a protein produced by the prostate — or abnormal rectal examination findings. 

The wider applicability of this technology is being investigated by other specialties. The learning curve for clinicians using microUS technology involves a combination of structured training and hands-on-experience. Clinicians must complete online training modules, become familiar with the PRIMUS scoring system for identification of ultrasound-visible lesions and work closely with company representatives to build proficiency. 

While early use is manageable with support, experts acknowledge that reaching a high level of diagnostic accuracy takes time. As a result, widespread implementation of this technology may be slowed by the need for comprehensive training, particularly in institutions without immediate access to training resources or experienced users. 

Implementing new technologies for tests that already have existing, effective procedures is challenging due to high costs, concerns with data privacy, cost of training staff and integrating with existing workflows to ensure the return on investment for the centers searching to change their technology. 

“I think in general for any new technology, there will be some resistance from providers who have an established workflow and are comfortable with their current approach. I do think that microUS technology does have the potential advantage of avoiding the need for MRI, which may save a significant amount of healthcare dollars and avoid a long and expensive exam for some patients,” Dr. Joseph Brito, urologist at Yale, told the News when asked about the challenges in implementing this technology. 

The American Urologic Association publishes practice guidelines that many urologists across the country use on a daily basis to inform their practice. The current guidelines discuss MRI as an option prior to prostate biopsy and recommend this targeted biopsy for anyone with a lesion identified on the MRI. There is no mention of microUS in the American Urologic Association, but it is a fairly new technology. 

JAMA is a peer-reviewed medical journal published 48 times a year by the American Medical Association. 

The post Micro-ultrasound challenges MRI in prostate cancer detection appeared first on Yale Daily News.

At a March virtual town hall, Yale New Haven Health System — YNHHS — administrators presented three key initiatives: the Access 365 program to streamline patient access, a redesigned operating model aimed at improving organizational alignment and a plan to expand clinical services into new geographic regions. 

Addressing faculty and staff, administrators cited external pressures and systemwide goals as reasons for the updates.

“We want to move from being good to being excellent,” YNHHS CEO Christopher O’Connor said at the event. “And part of that is going to be reacting and being ready to support changes that may be necessary.”

Access 365 progress

Peggy McGovern, CEO of Yale Medicine and chief physician executive for YNHHS, led the presentation on the system’s Access 365 initiative, aimed at streamlining scheduling, triage and financial transparency for patients. The initiative is structured around five pillars: capacity management, scheduling systems, referral processes, clinical coordination and financial health.

The Access 365 initiative is being implemented in phases across different specialties or departments. By gradually introducing reforms, Yale New Haven Health aims to test, refine and scale the system without overwhelming staff or disrupting patient care.

The Access 365 initiative has optimized scheduling to increase appointment availability, showing early signs of progress in reducing appointment lag, according to McGovern. For specialties included in the program’s first two phases, the median wait time for a new patient fell from 23 days to 16. 

However, the wait time remains above the industry benchmark of 14 days. In primary care, wait times have only improved slightly, from 30 to 29 days.

McGovern emphasized that while scheduling is often viewed as the primary access issue, underlying gaps in clinician availability are also central. For some services, particularly in primary care, staff shortages remain a limiting factor.

To improve communication and patient flow, YNHHS is transitioning from its previous Cisco-based call platform to a new system called Genesis, which offers artificial intelligence routing and built-in analytics.

McGovern noted that a February cyberattack, which rendered Cisco inoperable, accelerated the rollout of Genesis. The transition allowed 88 percent of call center volume to return to full functionality within weeks.

The initiative also introduced self-scheduling tools, but adoption remains low, with only 1.4 percent of patients using the feature. Patient experience scores related to scheduling have improved modestly. 

McGovern stressed that continued investments in scheduling technology, care triage staffing and template standardization are underway, with additional clinical areas slated for implementation through eight phases stretching into the coming year.

Operating model shifts 

Pamela Sutton-Wallace, the chief operating officer of Yale New Haven Health, introduced the health system’s new operating model — a structural redesign that aims to better align inpatient, ambulatory and at-home care under centralized leadership, she said.

The model divides care delivery into three main categories: inpatient operations, which refers to hospital-based care; ambulatory practices, which covers outpatient clinic visits; and health at home, which focuses on care delivered at home or through remote monitoring. 

Each of these care settings is supported by shared resources, including physician leadership, core medical services such as imaging and laboratory testing and centralized administrative teams for functions like human resources, digital technology and finance.

“What we know is that more and more care is being moved into the ambulatory setting,” Sutton-Wallace said. “And it’s better for our patients.”

The reorganization reflects a shift toward care delivery outside of traditional hospital settings. 

Ambulatory practices — including Yale Medicine, Northeast Medical Group and hospital-based outpatient clinics — will now report through a unified leadership team led by Jorge Rodriguez, chief ambulatory officer, and Dr. Patrick Kenney, chief ambulatory physician executive. The goal, Sutton-Wallace stated, is to bring consistency in clinical standards, safety protocols and patient experience across all outpatient settings.

Inpatient operations, previously embedded in service line structures, will now report to Courtney Bose, YNHHS chief nursing officer. 

Health at Home encompasses home health visits, remote monitoring and companion care, positioning YNHHS to respond to patient preferences for care closer to or within the home.

Platform services, including pathology, anesthesia and perioperative care, will serve all three verticals. Corporate services such as IT and HR will be further centralized, part of a broader effort to reduce redundancy and achieve economies of scale. Sutton-Wallace described the new model as consistent with national best practices at other large academic health systems.

The reorganization also includes changes to the roles of advanced practice providers, or APPs. Under the new structure, outpatient APPs will be more directly embedded into scheduling systems and clinical workflows, allowing them to practice at the top of their licenses and improve appointment availability.

“We are doing this work to get everyone working top of license,” McGovern said. 

Leadership acknowledged that the redesign will affect some staff roles but emphasized that most changes were managed through attrition and vacant positions. New roles have been created to support the redesigned model, they said.

Growth plans

In the final section of the town hall, CEO Christopher O’Connor and Yale School of Medicine Dean Nancy Brown outlined the system’s growth plans, focusing on geographic expansion and infrastructure development.

The goal, according to O’Connor, is to bring high-quality services closer to patients’ homes and expand Yale New Haven Health’s footprint in areas where demand is strong and access is limited. 

In Central Connecticut, the system plans to renovate a building it already owns to serve as a major outpatient hub. In Mid-Fairfield County, real estate searches are underway to establish a clinical presence between Bridgeport and Greenwich. In Westchester County, YNHHS is initiating services at two locations, with a particular focus on obstetrics, in response to rising demand and disruptions in local care availability.

“Over 50 percent of the inpatient admissions into Greenwich come from Westchester,” O’Connor said. “Establishing services there is critical to our future.”

Brown described the expansion as vital to executing the joint clinical strategic plan developed by the medical school and the health system.

Both Brown and O’Connor also addressed looming policy and financial uncertainties, including potential cuts to Medicaid and Medicare funding, as well as changes to site-neutral payment policies. Connecticut currently faces a $1.4 billion annual Medicaid funding gap, with YNHHS shouldering more than $450 million of that shortfall. Federal budget proposals signal further reductions.

“We didn’t build this reimbursement system,” O’Connor said. “We just try to manage within it.”

Despite these challenges, leaders reaffirmed their commitment to growth and emphasized that efficiency, coordination and patient-centered design will be at the core of future planning.

The Yale School of Medicine was founded in 1810.

The post Yale New Haven Health unveils updates to Access 365, operating model and growth plans appeared first on Yale Daily News.

Researchers have been studying the medical applications of machine learning for only around a decade, and the team focused their efforts on pushing the boundaries of this innovative tool with a unique experimental design. The research stands out as a crucial milestone, as their reported prediction strengths are relatively high for clinical measures. 

“While a lot of studies usually are using cross-sectional designs and comparing patients with PTSD compared to healthy controls or compared to trauma-exposed healthy controls, this study focused on recent trauma survivors during the first 14 months after trauma exposure,” said Dr. Ziv Ben-Zion, a Fulbright postdoctoral fellow at Yale and first author of the study.

According to Ben-Zion, the data used in the study was “quite unique” and collected as part of his doctoral research from 2015 to 2020, at Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center in Israel. 

Then, Ben-Zion recruited individuals who arrived at the emergency department after experiencing potentially traumatic events, the most common being car accidents. 

The patients who experienced high levels of PTSD one month after admission — who were most likely to develop chronic PTSD — were assessed one month, six months and 14 months after admission. To monitor each patient’s progress, clinical assessments and fMRI scans, recording brain structure and function, were performed. 

Ben-Zion shared good news: most of the patients recovered sometime during the 14 months of study. 

By the end of data collection, Ben-Zion had obtained a multi-domain data set detailing PTSD symptom severity — CAPS-5 total scores, on a scale of zero to 80 — as well as cognitive functioning and neural data for each of the 171 participants. 

This data set was used to develop the predictive machine learning model. The team used connectome-based predictive modeling, a machine learning technique originally developed in the Constable Lab at Yale that has gained popularity over the past decade.

The model works by applying 10-fold cross-validated regression models to whole-brain functional connectivity data derived from the fMRI BOLD signal to predict behavioral measures of interest, such as PTSD symptoms.

While the study showed no association between whole brain connectivity and symptoms at the six-month time point, there appeared to be high predictive ability at one month and 14 months. 

According to Ben-Zion, these findings align with current clinical knowledge about PTSD, which defines the six-month time point as a fragile and dynamic point in the recovery process.

After breaking down the PTSD symptoms into clusters based on the DSM-5, the team also noticed that different clusters were driving predictions at different time points, which suggests the connection of various regions in the brain to PTSD progression. 

For Dr. Scheinost, this finding will benefit the growing understanding of PTSD.

“I think it helps shift some of the neurobiological thinking about PTSD—moving away from characterizing a few key regions (like the amygdala) to more widespread, whole-brain alterations,” Scheinost wrote to the News. “That’s not to say that the amygdala or other single areas are not crucial to PTSD, just that we are likely only capturing a piece of the picture.”

A key aspect of the team’s work from the beginning was collaboration. Ben-Zion and his advisor, Dr. Ilan Harpaz-Rotem, first connected with AJ Simon, a doctoral student in Interdepartmental Neuroscience, and his rotation advisor at the time, Dr. Dustin Scheinost, around two years ago to expand their study on the initial data set. 

For Simon, who was a first-year rotating graduate student in Dr. Scheinost’s lab at the time, the project was an exciting new chance to explore machine learning models.

“I jumped on board because it was my opportunity to learn connectome-based predictive modeling and to apply it in a way where there was potential for translational impact,” said Simon.

The team worked on analyzing the data for six months and writing the paper for another six months before moving on to the review phase of their research, which took over a year before publication.

Looking to the future of the study, Dr. Ben-Zion hopes that other researchers will try to replicate the study with new data sets.

He noted that more researchers are currently publishing their own independent — and sometimes, inconsistent — findings, rather than focusing on replication to produce more robust results that build on prior studies.

While Harpaz-Rotem notes that it’s still a long way before MRI scans can be used as predictive clinical tools, the study shows promising results for the field’s future.

“I think the study demonstrates the capacity of [connectome-based predictive modeling] to be useful to identify the brain regions that are involved in the potential development of PTSD and think how we can intervene to prevent the development of PTSD based on this knowledge gained,” Harpaz-Rotem wrote.

To learn more about connectome-based predictive modeling, see here.

The post Yale researchers use machine learning to predict PTSD symptoms appeared first on Yale Daily News.

Medical terminology is notoriously challenging to laypeople and medical students alike. 

On March 19, Yale students put their spelling brains to the test in a Medical Spelling Bee hosted at the School of Medicine. Contestants represented various Yale disciplines, including students from the School of Medicine and the School of Public Health. In the end, Shaila Ghanekar MED ’27 a second-year medical student, who also won the competition last year, and Saba Saidi a second-year medical student from Albert Einstein College of Medicine won after correctly spelling balanoposthitis, an inflammation of the penis. 

After correctly spelling pinguecula, a raised bump on the eye, the second place team was eliminated on chenodeoxycholic, a bile salt. The third place team fell to collodion, a wound sealant, after spelling borborygmi, the sound of a digesting stomach, correctly.

“Given how many new words healthcare trainees have to learn, I figured it would be a fun way to bring people together across professional disciplines and laugh at the ridiculousness and complexity of some of the medical words that exist,” said Noah Brazer MED ’27, a second-year medical student and the organizer of the event.

Brazer conceived the idea when he watched Akeelah and the Bee on a flight to New Haven. In the movie, Akeelah Anderson, a young girl from Los Angeles, enters the National Spelling Bee competition and wins after spelling “pulchritude”.

The inaugural Med Bee took place last spring, and Brazer has organized one each semester since. Brazer says in order to convince friends to show up to the first Bee, and to raise sufficient  funds, he promised to dress up in light of the occasion. 

Brazer got his way and, true to his word, “dressed up in bee drag and performed to Imma Bee.” 

The Spelling Bee was divided into two parts: Jeopardy-style rounds where individuals or teams wrote down words and a classic elimination-style spelling bee.

The Jeopardy rounds were divided into five mini-rounds, each with five words: Warmup; Double Dose, featuring harder words worth double points; Pharmacophilia, covering generic drug names; Elusive Eponyms, focused on proper nouns; and Have You Heard?, showcasing words most people have never heard of.

Only some top contestants advanced into the classic spelling bee. In this round, teams stood at the podium and spelled words out loud, and were eliminated if they misspelled a word. Generous to his competitors, Brazer incorporated opportunities for teams to earn their spot back.

“The most magical part of the medical spelling bee is how many people show up from different programs: MD students, PA students, PHD students, MPH students and even medical and dental residents,” Eliza Epstein MED ’27 wrote to the News. “On top of the activity itself, I always look forward to meeting new people there!” 

Although this year’s turnout was lower than expected — with six rather than 15 teams — Brazer says the teams were skilled and were able to advance to the “the hardest level of difficulty (sudden death).”

“To me the Spelling Bee reflects the energy and uniqueness of Yale School of Medicine students,” Dr. Randi Epstein MED ’90, the Bee’s faculty advisor, told the News. “Why fret about the multi-syllabic hard-to-pronounce jargon? Just turn the learning process into a fun evening out with your classmates.”

Last year’s winning words were Escherichia, the long form of E. coli, and chikungunya, a mosquito-borne virus, which took second place. 

The post School of Medicine holds third medical spelling bee. Balanoposthitis was the winning word appeared first on Yale Daily News.

Kimmel’s research explores the intersection of revenge, violence and addiction. “The Science of Revenge” seeks to merge several academic fields: evolution and brain biology, criminology and psychology and addiction. 

“The Science of Revenge,” Kimmel explained, will serve as a non-violence toolkit. By distributing this information, he intends to inform policy makers, educators, parents, mental health professionals and the criminal justice system about violent and non-violent revenge seeking behavior.

“It’s based on the research of more than 60 neuroscientists at universities around the world, and I’ve been able to bring it all together with other research that talks about the role of revenge in violence and put that all together with all of the addiction research that exists,” Kimmel said.

Kimmel’s previous work has attempted to prevent and treat violent tendencies.

In the past, Kimmel launched the website SavingCain.org in an attempt to prevent homicides and mass shootings. SavingCain, modeled after suicide prevention websites, speaks directly to prospective killers before they strike. The site includes a page titled “Warning Signs of a Revenge Attack” based on popular public health campaigns for heart attacks. 

Kimmel also created The Nonjustice System, a “12-step program” to recover from revenge addiction, an unseen brain biological addiction triggered by a grievance, and the related Miracle Court App. This mental practice puts one’s mind inside an imaginary, or virtual, courtroom with the wrongdoer on trial. In this court, the wronged individual plays prosecutor, victim, judge and jury. This process, Kimmel elaborated, is intended to enable forgiveness while releasing revenge cravings and honoring that human desire for accountability. 

Human violence, Kimmel mentioned, is primarily a consequence of revenge addiction. Kimmel hopes this newfound understanding of revenge related behavior will demonstrate why we harm other people, but also provide pathways for solution. 

Jessica Stern, a professor at Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies who has taught classes on counter-terrorism and the history of terrorism, finds Kimmel’s discussion of revenge as an addiction powerful.

“Kimmel demonstrates that emerging neuroscientific and behavioral research indicates that retaliatory impulses from perceived injustices stimulate the same neural reward pathways as those activated in substance dependence,” Stern wrote to The News.

Kimmel argues that society should address revenge in the same way it addresses behavior addiction, which Stern finds compelling. 

Dr. Michael Norko DIV ’10, a professor of psychiatry at the School of Medicine, is a forensic psychiatrist who worked in the state’s mental health system for years. Norko was intrigued by Kimmel’s work. 

“These concepts of harm that people do to one another, and then the outcomes of those, is something I have a lot of experience with from a different perspective,” said Norko. “So Kimmel’s work resonates with me.”

Norko was impressed with the accessible writing of Kimmel’s book, and found its narrative style to be engaging and interesting.

By telling his own personal stories and presenting his information in a storytelling framework, Norko believes that Kimmel can reach a broad audience, which could be powerful in helping people to think about how society addresses revenge, including in the news and media.

“I think it can potentially have a profound effect on efforts to mitigate those effects in our lives,” Norko said. 

“The Science of Revenge” will be released on May 27.

The post James Kimmel Jr., Yale psychiatrist, to publish “The Science of Revenge” appeared first on Yale Daily News.

On March 19, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas approved a revised settlement between Prospect Medical Holdings and Medical Properties Trust. The Court’s decision allowed Prospect to proceed with a court-supervised auction of its hospital assets, including three Connecticut Hospitals — Waterbury Hospital, Manchester Memorial Hospital and Rockville General Hospital. 

The updated settlement allocates a greater share of sale proceeds to creditors such as the city of Waterbury and the state of Connecticut, which are owed more than $100 million combined. While the auction process is now underway, Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation filed a motion reserving its right under a 2022 asset purchase agreement with Prospect, expressing concern that the bankruptcy sale may impact its legal claims. 

“Each one of these steps is a step in the right direction toward finding a better outcome for the hospitals currently under Prospect Medical,” said Howard Forman, a professor of public health and economics.

Yale New Haven Health, which signed a $435 million agreement to acquire the three Connecticut hospitals in 2022, filed suit in 2024 to terminate the deal, citing Prospect’s alleged failure to meet financial, regulatory and operational obligations. Prospect filed a counterclaim, asserting that Yale had breached the agreement. That litigation, which has been transferred to federal court in Connecticut, remains unresolved.

In its reservation of rights filed on March 14, Yale raised concerns that Prospect’s plan to sell the hospitals through bankruptcy could interfere with the unresolved dispute.

“Notwithstanding the bidding procedures motion, Prospect has continued to take the position that the [Asset Purchase Agreement] remains effective and enforceable,” Yale’s attorneys wrote.

In its filing, Yale also alleged that Prospect failed to meet a wide range of financial, operational and legal obligations outlined in the original agreement — failures that, according to Yale, have severely damaged the hospitals’ ability to provide safe and consistent care. These included missed payments to physicians and vendors, neglect for routine maintenance and safety protocols and a ransomware attack that compromised the personal and medical information of more than 100,000 patients and employees, blaming it on Prospect’s lack of investment in adequate cybersecurity systems.  

Beyond operational concerns, Yale pointed to more than $100 million in unpaid provider taxes owed to the state and at least $12 million in overdue property taxes to the city of Waterbury, which have resulted in state and local agencies placing liens on the hospitals.

“Since signing the APA, the CT Businesses’ financial performance has collapsed,” Yale wrote. “It is therefore unclear whether the Debtors seek to impact YNHH’s rights in the Connecticut Action through the Bidding Procedures Motion.”

Yale argued that Prospect is trying to move forward with a bankruptcy sale while still claiming that the original $435 million APA between the two parties remains valid. This, according to Yale, creates legal confusion — particularly because Prospect has continued to send notices suggesting the Asset Purchase Agreement, or APA, is still in effect, despite now seeking to sell the same hospitals to new buyers through a separate court-supervised process. 

Additionally, Yale emphasized that any dispute over the APA should be decided in Connecticut State Court, as originally agreed by both parties. Yale is concerned that the Texas bankruptcy court process could undermine its ongoing lawsuit, where it claims that Prospect breached the agreement and that Yale is no longer obligated to complete the purchase. With a trial date originally scheduled for April, Yale is urging the court not to let the bankruptcy proceedings interfere with what it views as a nearly resolved case. 

While Yale raised alarms about Prospect’s mismanagement of the hospitals and the potential legal implications of their sale, the bankruptcy process is moving ahead. Prospect, now operating under Chapter 11 protections, is pursuing a structured sale process designed to resolve its financial crisis and transfer hospital ownership. 

In its Feb. 18 motion to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Prospect asked the court to approve a timeline and structure for auctioning its Connecticut hospitals. According to the filing, the sale process will unfold over several weeks. In mid-May, Prospect may select what’s known as a “stalking horse” bidder — a term for the first buyer who sets a minimum price in an auction. Other interested buyers would then have until late May to submit their offers. 

The auction itself is expected in early June, followed by a court hearing to approve the final sale. Medical Properties Trust will have a say in who the buyer is, especially if the hospital properties are still involved in the deal. 

In its motion to the court, Prospect described the auction as “a fulsome sale and marketing process … all while minimizing administrative costs associated with the chapter 11 process.”

The company argued that a well-organized, court-supervised auction would help draw in serious buyers, set fair prices and avoid dragging out the bankruptcy process. The goal, according to Prospect, is to make sure the hospitals are sold quickly and efficiently — protecting their value and reducing the risk of further disruption to patient care or hospital operations.

Forman noted that even though Yale walked away from its earlier deal with Prospect, the bankruptcy sale represents a new opportunity.

“The door was closed to acquiring [the hospitals] from Prospect, but acquiring them from bankruptcy is a different situation,” Forman said. “It’s almost like Prospect is out of the picture.” 

The uncertainty surrounding who will ultimately acquire and operate the hospitals has drawn concern from local officials and public health experts. While several healthcare systems are believed to be monitoring the sale process, the outcome could significantly influence healthcare access for New Haven communities. 

Prospect Medical Holdings is headquartered in Culver City, Calif.

The post Yale New Haven Health pushes back on Prospect’s Texas bankruptcy sale plan appeared first on Yale Daily News.

Since its separation from the School of Medicine in 2022, YSPH has grappled with having classes and labs scattered across eight different buildings, stretching from the School of Medicine up to near the New Haven Green. A new building, most likely to be constructed on 47 College St., would serve as one of the school’s two main hubs, although a construction timeline has not yet been established.

“Currently, YSPH is scattered across many New Haven buildings, several of which are leased spaces,” Provost Scott Strobel wrote to the News. “We are now in the early stages of planning a facility that matches the excellence of YSPH students, faculty, and staff.”

In September 2023, the school established the space planning committee, consisting of faculty from all six public health departments, multiple staff members and a doctoral student. Since its foundation, the committee has sent out multiple surveys requesting input and feedback from YSPH stakeholders.

In October 2023, the planning committee informed the community of the goal of consolidating most-to-all of YSPH into two buildings: the current Laboratory for Epidemiology and Public Health, or LEPH, and a new building.

The News spoke to current students at YSPH about how the lack of centralization has impacted their experiences and hopes for a future building.

“We are totally separate from main campus,” Yukang Zeng, MPH ’25, said. “We don’t have a sense of belonging because we are totally separated on different sides of different streets.” 

According to Zeng, although individual departments of YSPH tend to have classes in the same building, the core requirements of the degree program and the interdisciplinary nature of public health require students to travel frequently between faraway buildings.

Students also expressed that the environment and lack of natural light in the LEPH building were not conducive to learning, with most classes taking place in the basement. Additionally, they expressed that the disconnected spaces made it more difficult for collaboration, community building and accessing faculty support and resources.

“Right now, the public health building is a little jail-like, and isn’t the most optimal environment for learning as compared to, especially, the school environment or the business school,” Brit Fleck SPH ’25, said.

Students expressed a desire for a more inviting building architecturally, as well as a facility that would allow greater collaboration between students and faculty and provide a stronger sense of belonging. 

Campbell Mitchell SPH ’25 expressed hope that the new building would not be solely an isolated space for public health students, but rather a broader hub for community engagement across Yale.

The Laboratory of Epidemiology and Public Health is located at 60 College St.

The post YSPH plans new facility to consolidate school into two buildings appeared first on Yale Daily News.

In October 2022, after working at the School of Medicine for over two years, Sam Lee, then a genetics researcher, learned that an incubator he had been using was disconnected from its nitrogen gas tank, killing all the specimens Lee had been studying, the scientist claims. This January, Lee filed a lawsuit against the School of Medicine.

Lawyers representing Yale filed a response to Lee’s claims, claiming that Lee does not have the right to seek damages after accepting the University’s policies on intellectual property and research materials. The University’s attorney described that Lee had been investigated for allegedly fraudulent research and grant applications before he had come to Yale. The University filed counterclaims claiming that it had suffered damages by paying Lee a salary. 

“Had Yale known the extent of Lee’s research misconduct, grant application misconduct, and retractions, Yale would not have hired him and would not have accepted possession and ownership of the laboratory equipment and biological materials,” Yale’s lawyers wrote.

Lee began working as an associate research scientist in the School of Medicine’s orthopedics and rehabilitation department in April 2019, according to the complaint Lee filed in October. Upon accepting employment, Lee’s laboratory equipment, including a nitrogen gas incubator, was shipped to Yale from Massachusetts General Hospital, where Lee had conducted research through Harvard University.

According to the complaint, the incubator housed just under 20,000 containers of specimens, including monoclonal antibodies for therapeutic purposes and patented special cells. These genetic materials “comprised the balance of Lee’s life’s work,” the complaint claimed.

Around October 2022, Lee was notified by a colleague that his incubator’s connection tubing had been disconnected from its nitrogen tank by Airgas, a company that supplies the School of Medicine’s nitrogen tanks, the suit alleges. Lee claims he confirmed the next month that his genetic specimens were destroyed. Lee claims that the colleague told him that the disconnection occurred due to an “accounting issue.”

“Presumably [the School of Medicine] had failed to pay the liquid nitrogen vendor,” the complaint alleges. “Because of that, the vendor ceased providing liquid nitrogen to keep the incubator at the necessary temperature.”

The lawsuit accuses Yale of breach of contract, negligence, tortious interference, statutory theft and engaging with his materials without permission

Lee claims that in September 2023, the School of Medicine’s lawyers admitted that an internal investigation “determined that the loss of Dr. S. Lee’s research was a result of a ‘mix-up’ in the ordering of tanks arising out of a vacancy” in the School of Medicine staff position. 

Yale’s attorneys denied both of Lee’s proposed explanations for why the incubator was disconnected in their answer to the complaint.

In response to Lee’s suit, lawyers for the University have claimed that because Lee’s laboratory equipment and biological materials were acquired with federal grant money, including from the National Institutes of Health, Yale — as the grantee institution — should be considered the owner of those materials when they were to Yale.

“Because the laboratory equipment and biological materials are regulated by federal statutes and regulations, Dr. S. Lee’s state common law claims fail,” the University’s attorneys wrote, citing the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law.

Attorneys for Yale pointed out that Lee delayed filing the lawsuit “for years, with no valid excuse for the delay.” Yale, they claim, has a limited ability to consider Lee’s allegations because witnesses have died or emigrated outside the U.S., and documents have been purged due to the passage of time.

Then, the defense lawyers accused Lee of a history of “fraudulent” engagement with research grants. Before working at Yale, Lee allegedly included inauthentic data on a grant application to the NIH, leading Massachusetts General Hospital, Lee’s employer at the time, to repay the NIH the funds it received for that grant. In 2021, Lee paid $215,000 to settle allegations from a federal prosecutor that he had knowingly included inauthentic data and falsified results in his NIH grant application.

The University’s lawyers pointed out that major corrections were issued on several of Lee’s published papers, and five were entirely retracted.

The University’s response to the complaint states that Yale did not renew Lee’s appointment after it learned of the NIH grant fraud settlement.

“Because of Dr. S. Lee’s fraud, Yale suffered damages by paying Dr. S. Lee a salary from 2019 to 2023,” the lawyers wrote.

Yale has filed three counterclaims against Lee, alleging that he breached his contract with the University by rarely conducting work in person at Yale facilities in New Haven, neglected Yale-owned biological materials and deceived Yale about his history with the grant fraud case. Yale asked for compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and a rescission of the parties’ contract.

A trial is scheduled for September 2027 at the Hartford Superior Court.

The post Former School of Medicine researcher sues Yale for alleged damaged research appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The competition, open to all employees in Connecticut healthcare systems, will feature a symposium with national speakers addressing AI’s role in healthcare and live presentations of the top 12 proposals to an independent panel of judges. 

According to a press release from YNHHS, the competition is broken down into three phases: selection by participating institutions, judging of the selected proposals and the symposium, scheduled for May 27. The grand winner, in addition to winning $100,000, will have the opportunity to validate their algorithm in the Yale New Haven Health data ecosystem.

“We are thrilled to launch the Health AI Championship at a time when AI’s potential to revolutionize healthcare has never been greater,” said Dr. Lee Schwamm, chief digital health officer of YNHHS. “By inviting innovators to share cutting-edge ideas, we are not only fostering collaboration but also paving the way for real-world applications that can significantly improve patient outcomes and streamline healthcare operations.”

Six hospitals have already committed to participating in Yale New Haven Health’s AI Championship, including Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, Gaylord Hospital, Nuvance Health, Hartford HealthCare and UConn Health. Schwamm predicts the health AI championship will attract 20-30 teams from healthcare systems across Connecticut.

According to Schwamm, the goal of the Health AI Championship is to drive innovation from the needs of the broader Connecticut healthcare system beyond just YNHHS. He hopes to create an environment where health systems form partnerships to identify areas in which AI could be used most effectively.

AI is already used across health systems, Schwamm explained. 

For example, YNHHS uses an AI program to record and summarize conversations between patients and doctors. AI also produces a patient-friendly version of the medical consultation note. Doctors draft responses to patients with the help of AI, which streamlines communication between doctors and patients.

“Then we have a lot of stuff going on in imaging, where the AI is pre-reading the images and suggesting areas to that normality, or ordering the scans to get the most abnormal scans read first,” said Schwamm. “I would say it’s all over the whole system.”

Walter Lindop, who leads the Center for Healthcare Innovation at Yale New Haven Health, believes that AI has historically been used to expedite the administrative side of healthcare by automating routine tasks like prior authorizations. 

Through innovation in AI, Lindop hopes that healthcare systems will explore new applications centered around the patient experience. By automating routine tasks for clinicians, such as writing clinical notes, AI can relieve the burden of clinicians and allow more time for interactions with patients, improving the patient experience.

“It’s also improving the quality of the interaction with the patient and translating to that patient experience,” Lindop said. “So to me, the real advantage and shift forward is towards this idea of clinical decision support and clinical care and ultimately impacting the patient experience in a positive way.” 

At the YNHH Center for Healthcare and Innovation, nine out of the 25 ongoing projects involve the use of AI, according to Lindop. For example, YNHH has collaborated with companies to use AI in insulin dosing and to optimize supply chains.

Schwamm believes that AI’s most important application — and where it outperforms humans — is synthesizing large amounts of data.

He said that sources like Apple Health kits, health tracking software on smartphones and other applications track patient health and behavior. With AI models, doctors can identify which patients will do well with their treatment, which patients are less likely to follow up on recommendations and which patients might not come for a return visit. Health systems can utilize these tools to direct resources to patients at the greatest risk.

The competition will take place on May 27.

Correction, March 1: Nine, not 25, projects at the YNHH Center for Healthcare and Innovation involve the use of AI.

The post YNHHS launches healthcare AI innovation competition appeared first on Yale Daily News.