ArticlePerspectives on medical education2025
Seeing Ourselves in Others: Understanding and Addressing Biases in Medical School Admissions Processes.
Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2025. 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.
- Selection into Advanced Training in Rheumatology in Australia: towards a programmatic and theory-informed model.Internal medicine journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Medical school admissions is a vital area for advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Integrating bias recognition and management (BRM) within the context of admissions is critical in advancing DEI. However, there is a dearth of empirically informed literature on BRM in the admissions context. Therefore, this study sought to explore how individuals involved in admissions decisions process and integrate bias related feedback. Methods: The authors conducted a qualitative exploratory study using constructivist grounded theory. 21 semi-structured interviews were conducted with various participants in the admissions process at a North American medical school who had participated in bias related training. Participants included medical school faculty, senior medical students, and community volunteers. Results: Overall, participants expressed diverse perspectives on their personal biases and how these biases impact admissions decisions. Their reflections were shaped by their identities, values, and priorities, which varied based on whether they were faculty members, students, or community members. Participants also highlighted that their biases influenced their perceptions of the ideal admissions candidate, thus influencing their decision-making process. They emphasized the need for more opportunities to engage in dialogue with peers to openly share and discuss how to recognize and manage their biases. Conclusion: Our study suggests that fostering critical reflection about identity tensions, building and sustaining a community of practice, and facilitating sustained dialogue may provide admissions committees with an evidence-informed, meaningful, and sustained approach to advancing DEI through bias recognition and management.
Indexed as
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.