Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38894797›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Language Matters: Is There Gender Bias in Internal Medicine Grand Rounds Introductions?

Reem M Hanna, Eric Grimm, Angela Keniston, Rafina Khateeb, Areeba Kara, Marisha Burden

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Reem M HannaDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.
Eric GrimmDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.
Angela KenistonDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.
Rafina KhateebDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, USA.
Areeba KaraDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.
Marisha BurdenDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe performed an exploratory evaluation of gender-specific differences in speakers and their introductions at internal medicine grand rounds.

methodInternal medicine grand rounds video archives from three sites between December 2013 and September 2020 were manually transcribed and analyzed using natural language processing techniques. Differences in word usage by gender were compared.

resultsFour hundred and sixty-two grand rounds held at three institutions were examined. There were 167 (34.6%) speakers who were women and 316 (65.4%) who were men. The proportion of women speakers was significantly lower than that of women in the internal medicine workforce (34.6% vs. 39.2%, p = 0.04). Among 191 external speakers, only 57 (29.8%) were women. The use of professional titles was equivalent between genders. Despite equal mention of specific achievements in both male and female speaker introductions, there was a trend toward casting female speakers as being less established.

conclusionThere is a need to adopt processes that will decrease inequities in the representation of women in grand rounds and in their introductions.

Indexed as

career developmentgender biasgrand roundsleadershipnatural language processingobservational study design

Identifiers

PMID38894797
PMCPMC11184544

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.