ArticleMedical education online2025
Diversity, inclusion, and bias in Continuing Medical Education activities: lessons learned from participant evaluations.
Article in Medical education online, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRecommendations to ensure diverse, equitable, and inclusive content in Continuing Medical Education (CME) have been developed, however, learners' perception of these efforts are unknown. Learner recognition of biased or non-inclusive content and satisfaction with activity diversity provides insight into the success of bias mitigation efforts during CME planning and delivery. This study's objective was to evaluate the types of bias identified by learners, and to evaluate learners' perception of inclusivity and satisfaction with the diversity of CME activities. STUDY
designThis study was a retrospective mixed methods analysis of post-activity evaluation comments from 210 CME activities and 5,284 evaluations at a large Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME)-accredited academic healthcare system from September 1, 2022 to December 31, 2023.
resultsLearners were satisfied with speaker and content diversity in 98.9% of activities. The qualitative analysis included 967 comments and demonstrated four main categories of perceived bias or lack of diversity identified by the CME activity learners: 1) Bias related to social identity factors, of which racial, ethnic, and gender bias were the most common forms identified by learners; 2) Lack of diversity in speakers, content and delivery; 3) Resistance to bias and inclusion evaluation questions; and 4) Commercial/industry bias. Further, some learners noted the instructional design of certain activities was not inclusive of all learners.
conclusionThese findings suggest that some CME activity learners perceive various forms of bias and lack of inclusivity and diversity despite efforts to review and mitigate bias in the planning and delivery of CME. While most CME activity learners were satisfied with speaker and content diversity, the data can inform more targeted efforts during the CME planning phase that focus on speaker and content diversity and screening for bias that goes beyond traditional industry/commercial bias.
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.