Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40598039›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Differential gender bias in self-predicted performance in medical tests.

Adrian Soto-Mota, Andrés Castañeda Prado, María Fernanda González Lara, Laura Jael Ortiz, Pablo Soto-Mota

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Adrian Soto-MotaMetabolic Diseases Research Unit, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico. adrian.sotom@incmnsz.mx.
Andrés Castañeda PradoDepartment of Public Health, School of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
María Fernanda González LaraClinical Microbiology Laboratory, Infectious Diseases Department, National Institute of Medical Sciences and Nutrition Salvador Zubiran, Mexico City, Mexico.
Laura Jael OrtizTecnologico de Monterrey, School of Medicine, Mexico City, Mexico.
Pablo Soto-MotaCenter for Economic Studies, El Colegio de México, Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe proportions of men and women in some residency programs have been unbalanced. In recent years, Mexican regulations surrounding the national standardized test for residency programs (ENARM) have changed, allowing applicants to choose their desired residency program after knowing their score (instead of before taking the exam). Since, on average, women are more risk-averse than men, we hypothesized that the new regulation may have influenced the proportion of women applying to competitive residency programs by letting them choose without the uncertainty of their future test performance. Additionally, we evaluated if the accuracy in predicting test performance differs between men and women studying Medicine.

methodsWe analyzed data from 452,079 medical residency applications (and their respective ENARM performance) between 2010 and 2022. Additionally, we evaluated self-predicted test performance accuracy in 266 students (of which 61.7% were medical students), which differed between men and students of different biomedical faculties (Nutrition, Psychology, and Biosciences). As part of our sensitivity analyses, we examined whether the perceived difficulty of the evaluated topic or its relevance to their future career plans affected their predictions and test performance.

resultsThe proportion of women in highly competitive residency programs significantly increased during the years when applicants chose their programs after seeing their scores. While both Men and Women studying Medicine were more competitive and scored higher than students in other Biomedical faculties, Men studying Medicine predicted higher test scores than their female counterparts despite their actual scores not being statistically different. In comparison with women, men had larger overestimation errors about their actual test performance, predicted they would rank higher than their class peers, and predicted higher test scores independently of how difficult they perceived the tested topic to be.

conclusionThe percentage of women in highly competitive programs increased significantly when applicants chose their program after knowing their standardized test scores. Men studying Medicine overestimated their test performance vs. all other groups. Although their actual scores were not statistically different from those of women, men predicted higher test scores regardless of how difficult they perceived the evaluated topic to be or how relevant they thought it would be for their future career plans.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementInternship and ResidencySexismStudents, MedicalAdultFemaleHumansMaleMexicoENARMGender BiasMedical testsResidency programsStandardized tests

Identifiers

PMID40598039
PMCPMC12211690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.