ArticleAnesthesiology2026
Professionalism Perceptions: A Comparison of Anesthesiology Trainees and Attendings.
Article in Anesthesiology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProfessionalism is a core competency in graduate medical education, yet research examining specialty-specific professionalism perceptions between trainees and faculty remains limited, particularly regarding the influence of role and institutional culture on these perceptions. This study examined how anesthesiology trainees and attendings perceive unprofessional behavior and whether these perceptions differ based on participant characteristics.
methodsA multisite cross-sectional survey was conducted at five anesthesiology residency programs from February to March 2024. Participants rated degree of unprofessionalism on 19 workplace vignettes depicting potentially unprofessional behaviors using a 7-point Likert scale. Vignettes were categorized into five themes: verbal, supervision, quality, time, and engagement. Proportional odds models examined differences in ratings based on role (trainee vs . attending), adjusting for gender, race, underrepresented status, and institution.
resultsAmong 369 respondents (153 trainees, 216 attendings; 35.9% response rate), perceptions varied by scenario and participant characteristics. Six vignettes were more consistently rated as unprofessional (more than 80% unprofessional ratings), while four showed higher variability (less than 50% unprofessional ratings). Significant institutional differences were observed in five vignettes (odds ratios [ORs] less than 0.14 or greater than 3.7; P < 0.0001 to 0.027). Age influenced ratings of five vignettes (ORs, 0.75, 1.68, 1.63, 1.35, and 1.31, respectively; P < 0.0001 to 0.027), while gender, race, and underrepresented status showed no significant differences. After adjustment for demographics, trainees and attendings differed significantly in their ratings of 10 vignettes ( P < 0.0001 to 0.033). Attendings rated nine scenarios as more unprofessional than trainees (ORs ranging from 0.26 to 0.50), while trainees rated only one scenario as more unprofessional than attendings (OR, 2.01).
conclusionsPerceptions of unprofessional behavior among anesthesiology professionals vary significantly by role and institution. These findings underscore the importance of context-sensitive approaches to professionalism education that acknowledge diverse perspectives and institutional cultures while maintaining core professional standards.
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.