| Autor: |
Pitlick J; Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA.; Department of General Internal Medicine, Department of Hospital Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, New York, USA., Olson E; Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA.; Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, New York, USA., Halvorsen A; Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA., Fischer K; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA., Croghan IT; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA., Nordhues H; Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: Residency is a time of personal and professional growth. Resident assessment and feedback are an integral part of that process. However, assessment may be influenced by various types of bias, including gender bias. Women are less likely than men to be identified by their professional titles in many settings. The use of professional titles for residents in written assessments is unknown and may be a marker of bias. Objective: To assess for differences and trends regarding the use of professional and personal titles in formal resident assessments related to gender-based resident-faculty pairs. Methods: Electronic assessments of postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) internal medicine residents from the 2019-2020 academic year were used. Professional title use was analyzed, as it relates to resident-faculty gendered dyads, among other variables. The primary outcome of professional title usage was split into a binary variable by professional versus other titles and analyzed using logistic regression and random-effects model. Results: We analyzed 1,363 unique electronic assessments (37.8% from female faculty). Female residents were more likely to be addressed by a professional title than their male colleagues (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.4; p = 0.02). We found no difference in professional title usage based on resident-faculty gendered dyads. After adjusting for repeated faculty and resident encounters with random-effects model, secondary analysis found no significant difference in evaluation of word count between gendered dyads. Conclusions: The analysis found no significant difference in professional title usage based on resident-faculty dyads. In our analysis, female residents were significantly more likely to have their professional title used on assessments than male residents. |
