ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2024
Efforts to Reduce Bias in Clerkship Evaluations: A CERA Study.
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.
- Education Research: Moving Beyond "Outstanding": Neurology Program Directors' Perspectives on the MSPE Clerkship Summaries.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
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: As the number of medical students who identify as underrepresented in medicine (URiM) increases, the disparities related to gender and URiM status persist. This study examines the current initiatives within family medicine clerkships to reduce bias in evaluations. Methods: Our 10-item survey was included as a module in the 2022 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance national survey of family medicine clerkship directors. Our survey questions asked about whether programs had strategies to reduce bias in student evaluations, antiracism initiatives, perceptions on effectiveness of the initiatives, and type and cadence of faculty development on evaluations for preceptors. Results: The overall response rate for the survey was 59.12% (94/159); all respondents completed our module. Seventy percent said they had implemented strategies to reduce bias in evaluations, 60% felt these were effective, and 80% felt that reducing bias in evaluations was a priority. The majority, 89/91(95%), indicated that their medical schools had a current social justice, diversity, or antiracism initiative. We identified a positive association between specific antibias medical school initiatives and clerkship directors undertaking practices to reduce bias in evaluations ( Conclusions: Most programs had implemented strategies to reduce bias and felt that doing so was a priority. Community-based preceptors were less likely to have faculty development around reducing bias compared to those in academics. Further improvements may need to prioritize including community preceptors in educational efforts to reduce bias.
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.