ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2024
Exploring the Impact of Gender Bias Among Medical Trainees.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Methods for Studying Bias in Graduate Medical Education.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Research has suggested that health care providers are not immune to implicit and explicit gender bias among their own colleagues and in the treatment of patients. To date, limited research examines gender bias in trainees and how that bias might intersect with patient care. Our study focused on gendered expectations, perceived competence of medical providers, and perceived acceptability of patients who advocate for themselves. Methods: We used a 2x2x2x2 mixed design to examine the impact of participant gender, type of physical exam (vaginal vs elbow), trainee status, and gender of vignette physician. Participants read and responded to vignettes depicting various standardized clinical scenarios. The complete sample included 342 participants from a rural medical teaching hospital and a private liberal arts college in the same geographic region. Results: Findings suggested a significant interaction between physicality and gender of the participant on perceived competence. Conclusions: Although males and females had similar ratings of competence on an exam with low physicality (elbow), the data suggested that males did not recognize how errors during clinical practice may impact a hypothetical female patient. Future research might examine interventions that aim to increase awareness of gender bias among medical trainees and to explore whether interventions might improve patient care and perceptions of competence following identified errors.
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.