Design thinking is a problem-solving framework that has been used to enhance patient experiences, improve clinical outcomes, and refine medical curricula. This study reviewed the use of design thinking in health professions education. A search yielded 169 articles, which were excluded if they were: (1) not related to education; (2) lacking an application of design thinking; or (3) not associated with healthcare. The final review yielded 15 articles, which were analyzed using qualitative methods. All articles were published in 2009 or later and were diverse in their context, participants, and approach. Six studies emphasized the early stages of design thinking, with inspiration and ideation stages fostered through a variety of activities, such as lectures, small group discussions, and workshops. Studies examined a range of outcomes, including self-efficacy, perceptions, and solutions to a specific problem. Our findings raise important considerations for health professions education, including the extent to which we should: 1) teach design thinking to students as a skill-based tool to prepare students for problem solving in complex healthcare environments; and 2) use design thinking to create, implement, and refine health professions curricula and educational programs. Despite the apparent benefits of design thinking, many questions for health professions education remain.

Universal Design came into prominence as a successor to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), contributing to broader notions of accessibility beyond baseline codes and standards. Rooted in human factors research, Universal Design primarily centers on supporting human performance through the development of accessible and usable environments (Steinfeld and Maisel 2012, 95-96). As such, Universal Design pedagogies predominantly focus on enhancing environments for people with disabilities and aging populations (O Shea 2018, 721; Steinfeld and Maisel 2012, 49). However, some believe Universal Design is on the cusp of a paradigm shift to address broader aspects of social justice (Salmen 2012; Steinfeld and Maisel 2012, 159-160). This paper synthesizes existing literature to explore how current academic and practice-facing Universal Design pedagogies support the movement’s expansion to address social justice across demographic groups. Critical audiences for this work include architectural educators, students, researchers, policymakers, and building professionals interested in advancing the theory and practice of Universal Design. Recommendations from this work reposition Universal Design pedagogies as a pathway for creating more equitable and inclusive buildings, spaces, and communities that are truly designed for all.

Despite increasing awareness of the health risks associated with long‐term exposure to poor‐quality indoor air, many Americans often perceive ambient (outdoor) air pollution as a more significant threat. This perception is deeply rooted in historical fears, despite modern construction practices mitigating many of these risks. Although indoor air quality has only recently gained significant attention, it is a critical determinant of occupant satisfaction, well‐being, and health. This paper challenges two prevalent misconceptions about air quality in urban spaces: (1) That indoor air is always cleaner than ambient air, and (2) that poor indoor air is primarily caused by external, ambient sources. By analyzing both indoor and ambient air quality data from four urban office buildings in the US Southeast and Mid‐Atlantic region (Atlanta, Charlotte, Durham, and Washington, DC) alongside qualitative feedback, the study reveals that indoor air was only categorized as better than ambient air for 59.2% of working hours during the 12‐month period. While indoor air generally performed better than ambient air, significant fluctuations were observed, and in some cases, ambient air was cleaner than indoor air. Furthermore, the data showed that indoor pollution was more often influenced by internal factors, such as building materials, equipment, and occupant activities, rather than by external pollutants. The findings underscore the need for ongoing management of indoor sources of pollution, particularly in high‐performance environments. This research provides a comprehensive understanding of the complex relationship between perceived and measured air quality, advocating for a more nuanced approach to improving occupant health and satisfaction in urban office environments.

“Whence the strength?” This compelling question, posed by Aaron Antonovsky in 1979, sets the stage for understanding the role of sense of coherence (SOC), a human-focused psychosocial concept, in fostering resilience amidst escalating climate-induced disasters such as hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes. This paper is the first step in a larger research agenda aimed at exploring how the human experience of disasters, guided by Antonovsky’s SOC framework, can be better integrated into disaster recovery planning and design, laying the theoretical foundation for subsequent studies. This paper examines which supports help people stay resilient during disasters, focusing on the role of SOC in recovery. By integrating Antonovsky’s SOC concept with Hobfoll’s Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, it also draws from other published works on stress and disaster recovery to explore how disaster recovery planning and design can be improved. The findings indicate that the post-disaster recovery phase presents a critical window for implementing policies that address vulnerabilities in disaster-prone communities and enhance long-term resilience. Methodologically, this paper advocates for an interdisciplinary approach, suggesting that both quantitative and qualitative insights are vital for capturing human experiences in disaster contexts. Ultimately, this paper presents a framework for integrating human dimensions of resilience into disaster recovery planning.

The built environment is an important contributor to both climate change and public health. Transportation, land use, and buildings are three factors significantly impacting environmental and human health in urban areas. Health and built environment experts should actively collaborate to both cool cities and increase positive health outcomes.

(2019). Interdisciplinarity of Ph.D. students across the Atlantic. A Case of Interdisciplinary Research Team Building at the Student Level. The Design Journal: Vol. 22, Running with Scissors: 13th International Conference of the European Academy of Design, Dundee, 10-12th April, 2019, edited by Louise Valentine, Joanna Bletcher and Leon Cruickshank, pp. 1453-1466.