Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32672831›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Association of Gender With Learner Assessment in Graduate Medical Education.

Robin Klein, Nneka N Ufere, Sowmya R Rao, Jennifer Koch, Anna Volerman, Erin D Snyder, Sarah Schaeffer, Vanessa Thompson, Ana Sofia Warner, Katherine A Julian and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
12.7field-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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Robin KleinDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Internal Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Nneka N UfereDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Sowmya R RaoMassachusetts General Hospital Biostatistics Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jennifer KochDepartment of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Anna VolermanDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Erin D SnyderDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine.
Sarah SchaefferDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Vanessa ThompsonDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Ana Sofia WarnerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Katherine A JulianDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Kerri PalamaraDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Gender Equity in Medicine workgroup
Massachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USEmory University · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Chicago · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Gender bias may affect assessment in competency-based medical education. Objective: To evaluate the association of gender with assessment of internal medicine residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite, retrospective, cross-sectional study included 6 internal medicine residency programs in the United States. Data were collected from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, and analyzed from June 7 to November 6, 2019. Exposures: Faculty assessments of resident performance during general medicine inpatient rotations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Standardized scores were calculated based on rating distributions for the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's core competencies and internal medicine Milestones at each site. Standardized scores are expressed as SDs from the mean. The interaction of gender and postgraduate year (PGY) with standardized scores was assessed, adjusting for site, time of year, resident In-Training Examination percentile rank, and faculty rank and specialty. Results: Data included 3600 evaluations for 703 residents (387 male [55.0%]) by 605 faculty (318 male [52.6%]). Interaction between resident gender and PGY was significant in 6 core competencies. In PGY2, female residents scored significantly higher than male residents in 4 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.10 [0.04] vs 0.22 [0.05]; P = .04), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], -0.06 [0.05] vs 0.13 [0.05]; P = .003), professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], -0.04 [0.06] vs 0.21 [0.06]; P = .001), and interpersonal and communication skills (mean standardized score [SE], 0.06 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.06]; P < .001). In PGY3, male residents scored significantly higher than female patients in 5 of 6 competencies, including patient care (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.32 [0.05]; P = .03), medical knowledge (mean standardized score [SE], 0.47 [0.05] vs 0.24 [0.06]; P = .003), systems-based practice (mean standardized score [SE], 0.30 [0.05] vs 0.12 [0.06]; P = .02), practice-based learning (mean standardized score [SE], 0.39 [0.05] vs 0.16 [0.06]; P = .004), and professionalism (mean standardized score [SE], 0.35 [0.05] vs 0.18 [0.06]; P = .03). There was a significant increase in male residents' competency scores between PGY2 and PGY3 (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, 0.208-0.391; P ≤ .002) that was not seen in female residents' scores (range of difference in mean adjusted standardized scores between PGY2 and PGY3, -0.117 to 0.101; P ≥ .14). There was a significant increase in male residents' scores between PGY2 and PGY3 cohorts in 6 competencies with female faculty and in 4 competencies with male faculty. There was no significant change in female residents' competency scores between PGY2 to PGY3 cohorts with male or female faculty. Interaction between faculty-resident gender dyad and PGY was significant in the patient care competency (β estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY1 vs PGY3, 0.184 [0.158]; β estimate [SE] for female vs male dyad in PGY2 vs PGY3, 0.457 [0.181]; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, resident gender was associated with differences in faculty assessments of resident performance, and differences were linked to PGY. In contrast to male residents' scores, female residents' scores displayed a peak-and-plateau pattern whereby assessment scores peaked in PGY2. Notably, the peak-and-plateau pattern was seen in assessments by male and female faculty. Further study of factors that influence gender-based differences in assessment is needed.

Indexed as

Sex FactorsAdultAgedCompetency-Based EducationCross-Sectional StudiesEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, GraduateFaculty, MedicalFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSexismStudents, Medical

Identifiers

PMID32672831
PMCPMC7366188
OpenAlexW3043236887

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.