ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2020
Are There Gender-based Differences in Language in Letters of Recommendation to an Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program?
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How Prominent Are Gender Bias, Racial Bias, and Score Inflation in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Recommendation Letters? A Systematic Review.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic review of specialist selection methods with implications for diversity in the medical workforce.BMC medical education · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluation of Gender Bias in Psychiatry Residency Letters of Recommendation.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators for female practitioners in orthopaedic training and practice: a scoping review.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- The Impact of Applicant Sex on Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Letters of Recommendation: A Multisite Study.ATS scholar · 2025Article
- Letter to the Editor: How Prominent Are Gender Bias, Racial Bias, and Score Inflation in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Recommendation Letters? A Systematic Review.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Article
- Examination of residency program websites for the use of gendered language and imagery.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- A primer on writing a narrative letter of recommendation for medical students applying to residency.AEM education and training · 2023Article
- Gender-based Language Differences in Letters of Recommendation.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2023Article
- Sex bias in letters of recommendation and personal statements for otolaryngology residency.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Article
- Gendered Language in Letters of Recommendation for Applicants to Pulmonary Critical Care Fellowships.ATS scholar · 2022Article
- Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022Article
- Correlation of Ophthalmology Residency Application Characteristics with Subsequent Performance in Residency.Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) · 2021Article
- Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Are There Gender-based Differences in Language in Letters of Recommendation to an Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Article
- Gender Differences in the Language of LORs Written for Anesthesiology Medical Student Applicants: Analysis of One Program's Recruitment Cycle.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMArticle
- Mitigating Implicit Bias in Radiation Oncology.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- Race- and Gender-Based Differences in Descriptions of Applicants in the Letters of Recommendation for Orthopaedic Surgery Residency.JB & JS open accessReview
- Does ChatGPT Show Gender Bias When Drafting Letters of Recommendation for Applicants to Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs?JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLetters of recommendation are considered one of the most important factors for whether an applicant is selected for an interview for orthopaedic surgery residency programs. Language differences in letters describing men versus women candidates may create differential perceptions by gender. Given the gender imbalance in orthopaedic surgery, we sought to determine whether there are differences in the language of letters of recommendation by applicant gender. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Are there differences in word count and word categories in letters of recommendation describing women and men applicants, regardless of author gender? (2) Is author gender associated with word category differences in letters of recommendation? (3) Do authors of different academic rank use different words to describe women versus men applicants?
methodsUsing a linguistic analysis in a retrospective study, we analyzed all letters of recommendation (2834 letters) written for all 738 applicants with completed Electronic Residency Application Service applications submitted to the Johns Hopkins Orthopaedic Surgery Residency program during the 2018 to 2019 cycle to determine differences in word category use among applicants by gender, authors by gender, and authors by academic rank. Thirty nine validated word categories from the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count dictionary along with seven additional word categories from previous publications were used in this analysis. The occurrence of words in each word category was divided by the number of words in the letter to obtain a word frequency for each letter. We calculated the mean word category frequency across all letters and analyzed means using non-parametric tests. For comparison of two groups, a p value threshold of 0.05 was used. For comparison of multiple groups, the Bonferroni correction was used to calculate an adjusted p value (p = 0.00058).
resultsLetters of recommendation for women applicants were slightly longer compared with those for men applicants (366 ± 188 versus 339 ± 199 words; p = 0.003). When comparing word category differences by applicant gender, letters for women applicants had slightly more "achieve" words (0.036 ± 0.015 versus 0.035 ± 0.018; p < 0.0001). Letters for men had more use of their first name (0.016 ± 0.013 versus 0.014 ± 0.009; p < 0.0001), and more "young" words (0.001 ± 0.003 versus 0.000 ± 0.001; p < 0.0001) than letters for women applicants. These differences were very small as each 0.001 difference in mean word frequency was equivalent to one more additional word from the word category appearing when comparing three letters for women to three letters for men. For differences in letters by author gender, there were no word category differences between men and women authors. Finally, when looking at author academic rank, letters for men applicants written by professors had slightly more "research" terms (0.011 ± 0.010) than letters written by associate professors (0.010 ± 0.010) or faculty of other rank (0.009 ± 0.011; p < 0.0001), a finding not observed in letters written for women.
conclusionsAlthough there were some minor differences favoring women, language in letters of recommendation to an academic orthopaedic surgery residency program were overall similar between men and women applicants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given the similarity in language between men and women applicants, increasing women applicants may be a more important factor in addressing the gender gap in orthopaedics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.