Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36002822›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2022

How is physicians' implicit prejudice against the obese and mentally ill moderated by specialty and experience?

Chloë FitzGerald, Christian Mumenthaler, Delphine Berner, Mélinée Schindler, Tobias Brosch, Samia Hurst

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Weight Management Experiences Among People With CKD: A Qualitative Study.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Estimating implicit and explicit racial and ethnic bias among community pharmacists in Canada.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chloë FitzGeraldiEH2 (Institute for Ethics, History and the Humanities), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. cnsfitzgerald@gmail.com.
Christian MumenthalerDepartment of Information Science, Geneva School of Business Administration, Geneva, Switzerland.
Delphine BerneriEH2 (Institute for Ethics, History and the Humanities), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Mélinée SchindleriEH2 (Institute for Ethics, History and the Humanities), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Tobias BroschCISA (Swiss National Centre for Affective Sciences), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Samia HurstiEH2 (Institute for Ethics, History and the Humanities), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. samia.hurst@unige.ch.
University of Geneva · CHHES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplicit prejudice can lead to disparities in treatment. The effects of specialty and experience on implicit obesity and mental illness prejudice had not been explored. The main objective was to examine how specializing in psychiatry/general medicine and years of experience moderated implicit obesity and mental illness prejudice among Swiss physicians. Secondary outcomes included examining the malleability of implicit bias via two video interventions and a condition of cognitive load, correlations of implicit bias with responses to a clinical vignette, and correlations with explicit prejudice.

methodsIn stage 1, participants completed an online questionnaire including a clinical vignette. In stage 2, implicit prejudice pre- and post- intervention was tested using a 4 × 4 between-subject design including a control group. In stage 3, explicit prejudice was tested with feeling thermometers and participants were debriefed. Participants were 133 psychiatrists and internists working in Geneva, hospital-based and private practice. Implicit prejudice was assessed using a Weight IAT (Implicit Association Test) and a Mental Illness IAT. Explicit feelings towards the obese and the mentally ill were measured using Feeling Thermometers. A clinical vignette assessed the level of concern felt for a fictional patient under four conditions: control, obese, depression, obese and depression. Linear regression was conducted to test for association of gender, experience, and specialty with responses to vignettes, pre-intervention IATs and explicit attitudes, and to test for association of interventions (or control) with post-intervention IATs and explicit attitudes. Reported effect sizes were computed using Cohen's d. Two-tailed p < 0.05 was selected as the significance threshold.

resultsCompared to internists, psychiatrists showed significantly less implicit bias against mentally vs. physically ill people than internists and warmer explicit feelings towards the mentally ill. More experienced physicians displayed warmer explicit feelings towards the mentally ill and a greater level of concern for the fictional patients in the vignette than the less experienced, except when the patient was described as obese.

conclusionsSpecialty moderates both implicit and explicit mental illness prejudice. Experience moderates explicit mental illness bias and concern for patients. The effect of specialty on implicit prejudice seems to be based principally on self-selection.

Indexed as

Persons with Psychiatric DisordersPhysiciansPsychiatryAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansObesityPrejudiceDoctor–patient relationshipsExperienceImplicit biasMedical educationMental healthObesityPrejudiceSpecializationStereotypeTrainingVulnerable populations

Identifiers

PMID36002822
PMCPMC9400557
OpenAlexW4292952998

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.