ArticleJournal of medical systems2021
Patient Experience Surveys Reveal Gender-Biased Descriptions of Their Care Providers.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex differences in online ratings of healthcare professionals in Moscow: A cross-sectional study.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- The influence of emergency physician gender on patient experience surveys.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Physician Gender and Patient Perceptions of Interpersonal and Technical Skills in Online Reviews.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Classification of Patients' Judgments of Their Physicians in Web-Based Written Reviews Using Natural Language Processing: Algorithm Development and Validation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Relation of satisfaction score with payer class in dermatology patients.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient experience surveys (PES) are collected by healthcare systems as a surrogate marker of quality and published unedited online for the purpose of transparency, but these surveys may reflect gender biases directed toward healthcare providers. This retrospective study evaluated PES at a single university hospital between July 2016 and June 2018. Surveys were stratified by overall provider rating and self-identified provider gender. Adjectives from free-text survey comments were extracted using natural language processing techniques and applied to a statistical machine learning model to identify descriptors predictive of provider gender. 109,994 surveys were collected, 17,395 contained free-text comments describing 687 unique providers. The mean overall rating between male (8.84, n = 8558) and female (8.80, n = 8837) providers did not differ (p = 0.149). However, highly-rated male providers were more often described for their agentic qualities using adjectives such as "informative," "forthright," "superior," and "utmost" (OR 1.48, p < 0.01)-whereas highly-rated female providers were more often described by their communal qualities through adjectives such as "empathetic," "sweet," "warm," "attentive," and "approachable" (OR 2.11, p < 0.0001). PES may contain gender stereotypes, raising questions about their impact on physicians and their validity as a quality metric which must be balanced with the need for unedited transparency. Future prospective studies are needed to further characterize this trend across geographically and racially diverse healthcare providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34468879What 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.