ArticleJAMA network open2022
Assessment of Implicit Gender Bias During Evaluation of Procedural Competency Among Emergency Medicine Residents.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Differential attainment within medical education: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond the Scores: Gendered Interpretations of Emergency Medicine Resident Assessments of Interdependent Performances.Perspectives on medical education · 2025Article
- Differences in Emergency Medicine Resident Procedural Reporting by Gender in the United States.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Article
- An Automated System for Physician Trainee Procedure Logging via Electronic Health Records.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Intersectional Disparities in Emergency Medicine Residents' Performance Assessments by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Gender Differences in Emergency Medicine Attending Physician Comments to Residents: A Qualitative Analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Gender differences in emergency medicine resident assessment: A scoping review.AEM education and training · 2022Article
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
Importance: Gender disparities exist throughout medicine. Recent studies have highlighted an attainment gap between male and female residents in performance evaluations on Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones. Because of difficulties in blinding evaluators to gender, it remains unclear whether these observed disparities are because of implicit bias or other causes. Objective: To estimate the magnitude of implicit gender bias in assessments of procedural competency in emergency medicine residents and whether the gender of the evaluator is associated with identified implicit gender bias. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study was performed from 2018 to 2020 in which emergency medicine residency faculty assessed procedural competency by evaluating videos of residents performing 3 procedures in a simulated environment. They were blinded to the intent of the study. Proceduralists were filmed performing each procedure from 2 different viewpoints simultaneously by 2 different cameras. One was a gender-blinded (ie, hands-only) view, and the other a wide-angled gender-evident (ie, whole-body) view. The faculty evaluators viewed videos in a random order and assessed procedural competency on a global rating scale with extensive validity evidence for the evaluation of video-recorded procedural performance. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was to determine if there was a difference in the evaluation of procedural competency based on gender. The secondary outcome was to determine if there was a difference in the evaluations based on the gender of the evaluator. Results: Fifty-one faculty evaluators enrolled from 19 states, with 22 male participants (43.1%), 29 female participants (56.9%), and a mean (SD) age of 37 (6.4) years. Each evaluator assessed all 60 procedures: 30 gender-blinded (hands-only view) videos and 30 identical gender-evident (wide angle) videos. There were no statistically significant differences in the study evaluators' scores of the proceduralists based on their gender, and the gender of the evaluator was not associated with the difference in mean scores. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, we did not identify a difference in the evaluation of procedural competency based upon the gender of the resident proceduralist or the gender of the faculty evaluator.
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.