Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40060160›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2025

Investigating the Road to Equity: A Scoping Review of Solutions to Mitigate Implicit Bias in Assessment within Medical Education.

Kristin E Mangalindan, Tasha R Wyatt, Kirsten R Brown, Marina Shapiro, Lauren A Maggio

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

5 authors.

Kristin E MangalindanUniformed Services University of Health Sciences and Internal Medicine physician, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, CA, US.ORCID 0000-0002-1004-5283
Tasha R WyattDepartment of Health Professions Education, Center for Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, US.ORCID 0000-0002-0071-5298
Kirsten R BrownDepartment of Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, US.ORCID 0000-0002-1008-4397
Marina ShapiroDepartment of Health Professions Education, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, US.ORCID 0000-0002-5584-3449
Lauren A MaggioDepartment of Medical Education, University Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago, Chicago, IL, US.ORCID 0000-0002-2997-6133

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In medical education, assessments have high-stakes implications. Yet, assessments are rife with unconscious bias, which contributes to inequitable social structures. Implicit bias in assessment must be addressed because medical educators use assessments to guide learning and promote development of physicians' careers. In this scoping review, the authors map the literature on implicit bias in assessment, as it applies to: 1) the types of implicit bias addressed, 2) the targets and types of interventions studied or proposed, and 3) how publications describe intervention efficacy. Methods: The authors conducted a scoping review of the literature on interventions to mitigate implicit bias that was published between January 2010 and August 2023. Author pairs independently screened articles for inclusion and extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved with discussion and consensus. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was informed by Anderson et al's three assessment orientations: fairness, assessment for inclusion (AfI), and justice. Results: 7,831 articles were identified; 54 articles were included. The majority (n = 37; 69%) of articles focus on implicit bias toward those underrepresented in medicine. Interventions to mitigate implicit bias were targeted toward admissions and applications, faculty training, recruitment, summative assessments, and evaluation templates. Interventions had Discussion: This scoping review showed that more work is necessary to address different types of implicit biases, move scholarship beyond single-institution studies, refine existing interventions, and evaluate how efficacy is defined.

Indexed as

Bias, ImplicitEducational MeasurementEducation, MedicalHumans

Identifiers

PMID40060160
PMCPMC11887471

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.