Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39244774›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2024

Recommendations to address and research systemic bias in assessment: perspectives from directors of research in medical education.

Fei Chen, Celia Laird O'Brien, Maria A Blanco, Kathryn N Huggett, Donna B Jeffe, Martin V Pusic, Judith M Brenner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Fei ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Celia Laird O'BrienDepartment of Medical Education, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Maria A BlancoOffice of Educational Affairs, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Kathryn N HuggettTeaching Academy, Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.
Donna B JeffeDepartment of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Martin V PusicDepartment of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Judith M BrennerDepartment of Medicine, New York University Grossman Long Island School of Medicine, Mineola, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAddressing systemic bias in medical school assessment is an urgent task for medical education. This paper outlines recommendations on topic areas for further research on systemic bias, developed from a workshop discussion at the 2023 annual meeting of the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education. MATERIALS AND

methodsDuring the workshop, directors engaged in small-group discussions on guidelines to address bias in assessment practices following a proposed categorization of 'Do's,' 'Don'ts,' and 'Don't knows' and listed their insights using anonymous sticky notes, which were shared and discussed with the larger group of participants. The authors performed a content analysis of the notes through deductive and inductive coding. We reviewed and discussed our analysis to reach consensus.

resultsThe workshop included 31 participants from 28 institutions across the US and Canada, generating 51 unique notes. Participants identified 23 research areas in need of further study. The inductive analysis of proposed research areas revealed four main topics: 1) The role of interventions, including pre-medical academic interventions, medical-education interventions, assessment approaches, and wellness interventions; 2) Professional development, including the definition and assessment of professionalism and professional identity formation; 3) Context, including patient care and systemic influences; and 4) Research approaches. DISCUSSION: While limited to data from a single workshop, the results offered perspectives about areas for further research shared by a group of directors of medical education research units from diverse backgrounds. The workshop produced valuable insights into the need for more evidence-based interventions that promote more equitable assessment practices grounded in real-world situations and that attenuate the effects of bias.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalBiasCanadaEducational MeasurementHumansProfessionalismResearchSchools, MedicalUnited Statesassessment equityevidence-basedMedical educationresearch recommendationssystemic bias

Identifiers

PMID39244774
PMCPMC11382691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.