ReviewJB & JS open access
Does ChatGPT Show Gender Bias When Drafting Letters of Recommendation for Applicants to Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs?
Review in JB & JS open access. 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
Introduction: Implicit gender biases in letters of recommendation (LoRs) may differentially influence the success of applicants to residency positions. With the inevitable use of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT to draft LoRs, concerns have emerged regarding whether these models reproduce human biases in their writing. The purpose of this study was to examine whether ChatGPT exhibits gender bias when drafting LoRs for hypothetical orthopaedic surgery residency applicants. Methods: Thirty paired prompts were created describing a variety of mentor-mentee relationships, manipulating only the applicant's gendered name and pronouns while holding all other factors constant. Prompts were sequentially input into ChatGPT-5.0, and output LoRs were saved. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software was used to characterize LoRs across 4 summary measures and 28 word categories. Paired Results: The mean length of recommendations for men was 304 ± 53 words. For women, the mean length was 310 ± 47 words. There was no significant difference in word count between groups (p = 0.364). However, recommendations for women were composed of more auxiliary verbs (4.67% ± 1.10% vs. 4.17% ± 1.02%; p = 0.045), communication-related words (0.80% ± 0.51% vs. 0.59% ± 0.46%; p = 0.047), and personal pronouns (10.48% ± 1.18% vs. 9.82% ± 0.87%; p = 0.005) than recommendations for men. A follow-up analysis using a gender-neutral name, while only varying pronouns between prompts demonstrated that recommendations for women were composed of more "prosocial" words than recommendations for men (3.27% ± 1.16% vs. 2.79% ± 1.00%; p = 0.003). Conclusion: ChatGPT-assisted drafting of LoRs includes nuanced and systematic gender-based linguistic differences. For orthopaedic letter writers, the use of LLMs must be accompanied by structured review, bias-aware training, and standardized templates to avoid inadvertently perpetuating inequities.
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.