ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2021
An Analysis of Gender Bias in Plastic Surgery Resident Assessment.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender Differences in Operative Autonomy Using the Surgical Autonomy Program: A Multicenter Study.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Article
- Differential attainment in assessment of postgraduate surgical trainees: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Competency-based medical education in the United States: What the otolaryngologist needs to know.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Review
- The American Board of Surgery flexible endoscopy curriculum prepares individuals to pass the fundamentals of endoscopic surgery manual skills test.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Proceed, With Caution: Unconscious Bias in Technical Assessment.Journal of graduate medical education · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have shown men and women attending physicians rate or provide operating room (OR) autonomy differently to men and women residents, with men attendings providing higher ratings and more OR autonomy to men residents. Particularly with the advent of competency-based training in plastic surgery, differential advancement of trainees influenced by gender bias could have detrimental effects on resident advancement and time to graduation.
objectiveWe determined if plastic surgery residents are assessed differently according to gender.
methodsThree institutions' Operative Entrustability Assessment (OEA) data were abstracted from inception through November 2018 from MileMarker, a web-based program that stores trainee operative skill assessments of CPT-coded procedures. Ratings are based on a 5-point scale. Linear regression with postgraduate year adjustment was applied to all completed OEAs to compare men and women attendings' assessments of men and women residents.
resultsWe included 8377 OEAs completed on 64 unique residents (25% women) by 51 unique attendings (29% women): men attendings completed 83% (n = 6972; 5859 assessments of men residents; 1113 of women residents) and women attendings completed 17% (n = 1405; 1025 assessments of men residents; 380 of women residents). Adjusted analysis showed men attendings rated women residents lower than men residents (
conclusionsOur dataset including 4.5 years of data from 3 training programs showed men attendings scored women plastic surgery residents lower than their men counterparts.
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.