Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31660944›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

Implicit gender bias among US resident physicians.

Matt Hansen, Amanda Schoonover, Barbara Skarica, Tabria Harrod, Nathan Bahr, Jeanne-Marie Guise

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Resident Operative Autonomy and Attending Verbal Feedback Differ by Resident and Attending Gender.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023
    Article
  13. Feminization of science: female pioneering in the healthcare area.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matt HansenCenter for Policy and Research in Emergency Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, CR114, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. hansemat@ohsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2958-6423
Amanda SchoonoverDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Barbara SkaricaDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Tabria HarrodDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Nathan BahrDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Jeanne-Marie GuiseDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA.
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US) R18 HS23457AHRQ HHS R18 HS023457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to characterize implicit gender bias among residents in US Emergency Medicine and OB/GYN residencies.

methodsWe conducted a survey of all allopathic Emergency Medicine and OB/GYN residency programs including questions about leadership as well as an implicit association test (IAT) for unconscious gender bias. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the Likert-type survey responses and used standard IAT analysis methods. We conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to identify factors that were associated with implicit bias. We conducted a subgroup analysis of study sites involved in a multi-site intervention study to determine if responses were different in this group.

resultsOverall, 74% of the programs had at least one respondent. Out of 14,234 eligible, 1634 respondents completed the survey (11.5%). Of the five sites enrolled in the intervention study, 244 of 359 eligible residents completed the survey (68%). Male residents had a mean IAT score of 0.31 (SD 0.23) and females 0.14 (SD 0.24), both favoring males in leadership roles and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01). IAT scores did not differ by postgraduate year (PGY). Multivariable analysis of IAT score and participant demographics confirmed a significant association between female gender and lower IAT score. Explicit bias favoring males in leadership roles was associated with increased implicit bias favoring males in leadership roles (r = 0.1 p < 0.001).

conclusionsWe found that gender bias is present among US residents favoring men in leadership positions, this bias differs between male and female residents, and is associated with discipline. Implicit bias did not differ across training years, and is associated with explicit bias.

Indexed as

LeadershipSexismEmergency MedicineFemaleGynecologyHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleObstetricsPhysiciansSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesGender biasGraduate medical educationImplicit biasLeadershipMedical education

Identifiers

PMID31660944
PMCPMC6819402
OpenAlexW2982445545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.