Background Research shows that female trainees experience evaluation penalties for gender non‐conforming behaviour during medical training. Studies of medical education evaluations and performance scores do reflect a gender bias, though studies are of varying methodology and results have not been consistent. Objective We sought to examine the differences in word use, competency themes and length within written evaluations of internal medicine residents at scale, considering the impact of both faculty and resident gender. We hypothesised that female internal medicine residents receive more negative feedback, and different thematic feedback than male residents. Methods This study utilised a corpus of 3864 individual responses to positive and negative questions over the course of six years (2012‐2018) within Yale University School of Medicine's internal medicine residency. Researchers developed a sentiment model to assess the valence of evaluation responses. We then used natural language processing (NLP) to evaluate whether female versus male residents received more positive or negative feedback and if that feedback focussed on different Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competencies based on their gender. Evaluator‐evaluatee gender dyad was analysed to see how it impacted quantity and quality of feedback. Results We found that female and male residents did not have substantively different numbers of positive or negative comments. While certain competencies were discussed more than others, gender did not seem to influence which competencies were discussed. Neither gender trainee received more written feedback, though female evaluators tended to write longer evaluations. Conclusions We conclude that when examined at scale, quantitative gender differences are not as prevalent as has been seen in qualitative work. We suggest that further investigation of linguistic phenomena (such as context) is warranted to reconcile this finding with prior work.

Introduction: While residents must meet standardized educational milestones to graduate, individualized mentorship and guidance can help them achieve personal and career goals. A novel mentor, advisor, and coach (MAC) program was created for residents of the Yale University Traditional Internal Medicine Residency Program to help them attain these goals. Methods: Internal medicine faculty were recruited into the MAC program and matched with residents, with each faculty paired with one to three mentees. A structured roadmap was used to guide program content (including topics of mentoring, advising, and coaching), and meetings were individualized to cater to the needs of residents. During the 2017-2018 academic year, online surveys and focus groups were used to obtain feedback from participants. Results: Survey responses were obtained from 50 of the 116 residents (43%) and 21 of the 49 MAC faculty (43%). Thirteen residents and five MAC faculty participated in in-person focus groups. Most participants (92% of interns, 83% of residents, and 95% of MAC faculty) felt the program was beneficial and should continue. Individualized relationships and meeting content were key to the program's success. Areas for improvement included clarification of the program's purpose and each party's responsibilities in scheduling meetings. MAC faculty also requested faculty development tools to help them meet expectations of being a MAC. Discussion: The MAC program provided a successful avenue for mentorship and guidance for residents. Central themes to enhance participants' experience were individualization and flexibility, mutual agreement of the ground rules, and enhanced communication from program leadership.

Feedback on postdischarge patient outcomes is lacking in both undergraduate and graduate medical education and is needed to develop trainee competence in orchestrating transitions of care. The authors describe a brief, low-resource intervention delivered to medical students and internal medicine residents at the end of an inpatient internal medicine rotation. During the session, facilitators reviewed postdischarge outcomes obtained from the electronic health record, fostered self-reflection, and coached to develop goals for future practice. The authors assessed the impact on both trainee and faculty knowledge and attitudes.

No abstract