ArticleThe American journal of emergency medicine2026
The influence of emergency physician gender on patient experience surveys.
Article in The American journal of emergency medicine, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundPatient experience surveys are used to evaluate emergency physician (EP) performance, but they may be subject to gender bias. This study aimed to quantify the impact of EP gender on (1) the use of communal and agentic descriptors in free-text comments and (2) quantitative scores on patient experience surveys.
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted in a single urban, academic tertiary care emergency department (ED) that serves a diverse patient population. We included surveys for patients discharged from the ED during 1/1/19-12/31/21. Primary outcomes were the use of positive communal and agentic descriptors of the EP in the free-text portions of the patient experience surveys. Secondary outcome was mean quantitative physician score. Analyses included descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses, as well as a mixed effects model adjusted for patient and physician demographics and ED length of stay.
resultsWe studied 883 encounters (501 [57 %] female patients) with applicable free-text comments in the patient experience surveys. In a multivariable mixed effects model adjusted for patient, physician, and operational variables, all-women, all-men, and mixed gender physician teams were equally likely to be described by positive communal terms and positive agentic terms. We also studied 3707 encounters (2077 [56 %] female patients) with quantitative physician scores available in the patient experience surveys. In a similar multivariable mixed effects model, physician gender was not associated with differences in mean physician scores. The median age in the larger cohort was 50 (IQR 26-64), and older patient age was associated with higher quantitative scores (p = 0.004).
conclusionAmong ED patients, physician gender was not associated with the language used to describe physicians or the quantitative scores assigned to them.
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.