Arjun Dayal

Importance: Although implicit bias in medical training has long been suspected, it has been difficult to study using objective measures, and the influence of sex and gender in the evaluation of medical trainees is unknown. The emergency medicine (EM) milestones provide a standardized framework for longitudinal resident assessment, allowing for analysis of resident performance across all years and programs at a scope and level of detail never previously possible. Objective: To compare faculty-observed training milestone attainment of male vs female residency training. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, longitudinal, retrospective cohort study took place at 8 community and academic EM training programs across the United States from July 1, 2013, to July 1, 2015, using a real-time, mobile-based, direct-observation evaluation tool. The study examined 33 456 direct-observation subcompetency evaluations of 359 EM residents by 285 faculty members. Main Outcomes and Measures: Milestone attainment for male and female EM residents as observed by male and female faculty throughout residency and analyzed using multilevel mixed-effects linear regression modeling. Results: A total of 33 456 direct-observation evaluations were collected from 359 EM residents (237 men [66.0%] and 122 women [34.0%]) by 285 faculty members (194 men [68.1%] and 91 women [31.9%]) during the study period. Female and male residents achieved similar milestone levels during the first year of residency. However, the rate of milestone attainment was 12.7% (0.07 levels per year) higher for male residents through all of residency (95% CI, 0.04-0.09). By graduation, men scored approximately 0.15 milestone levels higher than women, which is equivalent to 3 to 4 months of additional training, given that the average resident gains approximately 0.52 levels per year using our model (95% CI, 0.49-0.54). No statistically significant differences in scores were found based on faculty evaluator gender (effect size difference, 0.02 milestone levels; 95% CI for males, -0.09 to 0.11) or evaluator-evaluatee gender pairing (effect size difference, -0.02 milestone levels; 95% CI for interaction, -0.05 to 0.01). Conclusions and Relevance: Although male and female residents receive similar evaluations at the beginning of residency, the rate of milestone attainment throughout training was higher for male than female residents across all EM subcompetencies, leading to a gender gap in evaluations that continues until graduation. Faculty should be cognizant of possible gender bias when evaluating medical trainees.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has shown a gender gap in the evaluations of emergency medicine (EM) residents' competency on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones, yet the practical implications of this are not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the gender gap in evaluations, we examined qualitative differences in the feedback that male and female residents received from attending physicians. METHODS: This study used a longitudinal qualitative content analysis of narrative comments by attending physicians during real-time direct observation milestone evaluations of residents. Comments were collected over 2 years from 1 ACGME-accredited EM training program. RESULTS: In total, 1317 direct observation evaluations with comments from 67 faculty members were collected for 47 postgraduate year 3 EM residents. Analysis of the comments revealed that the ideal EM resident possesses many stereotypically masculine traits. Additionally, examination of a subset of the residents (those with 15 or more comments, n = 35) showed that when male residents struggled, they received consistent feedback from different attending physicians regarding aspects of their performance that needed work. In contrast, when female residents struggled, they received discordant feedback from different attending physicians, particularly regarding issues of autonomy and assertiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed qualitative differences in the kind of feedback that male and female EM residents received from attending physicians. The findings suggest that attending physicians should endeavor to provide male and female residents with consistent feedback and guard against gender bias in their perceptions of residents' capabilities.

Why do women continue to face barriers to success in professions, especially male-dominated ones, despite often outperforming men in similar subjects during schooling? With this study, we draw on role expectations theory to understand how inequality in assessment emerges as individuals transition from student to professional roles. To do this, we leverage the case of medical residency so that we can examine how changes in role expectations shape assessment while holding occupation and organization constant. By analyzing a dataset of 2,765 performance evaluations from a three-year emergency medicine training program, we empirically demonstrate that women and men are reviewed as equally capable at the beginning of residency, when the student role dominates; however, in year three, when the colleague role dominates, men are perceived as outperforming women. Furthermore, when we hold resident performance somewhat constant by comparing feedback to medical errors of similar severity, we find that in the third year of residency, but not the first, women receive more harsh criticism and less supportive feedback than men. Ultimately, this study suggests that role expectations, and the implicit biases they can trigger, matter significantly to the production of gender inequality, even when holding organization, occupation, and resident performance constant.