Evaluation of interns by senior residents and faculty: is there any difference?

Ringdahl, Erika N.; Delzell, John E; Kruse, Robin L.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01832.x

Cited by 18 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis of overall average marks showed no interaction between candidate gender and the number of assessments made by female examiners, in keeping with the analysis by Ringdahl et al, which failed to demonstrate gender bias from senior residents and faculty members in rating family-practice interns [17]. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Performance in the MRCP(UK) Examination 2003–4: analysis of pass rates of UK graduates in relation to self-declared ethnicity and gender

Dewhurst¹,

McManus

Mollon³

et al. 2007

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Performance in the MRCP(UK) Examination 2003–4: analysis of pass rates of UK graduates in relation to self-declared ethnicity and gender

Dewhurst¹,

McManus

Mollon³

et al. 2007

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The structured search strategy yielded nine unique studies meeting inclusion criteria. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Table 1 details extracted data and Table 2 details quality characteristics of included studies based on guidelines for qualitative and quantitative studies. 23,24 Heterogeneity in methods and outcome measures across studies precluded meta-analysis and comparison of study quality via established indices.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Bias in Resident Assessment in Graduate Medical Education: Review of the Literature

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Competency-based medical education relies on meaningful resident assessment. Implicit gender bias represents a potential threat to the integrity of resident assessment. We sought to examine the available evidence of the potential for and impact of gender bias in resident assessment in graduate medical education. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the presence and influence of gender bias on resident assessment. We searched Medline and Embase databases to capture relevant articles using a tiered strategy. Review was conducted by two independent, blinded reviewers. We included studies with primary objective of examining the impact of gender on resident assessment in graduate medical education in the USA or Canada published from 1998 to 2018. RESULTS: Nine studies examined the existence and influence of gender bias in resident assessment and data included rating scores and qualitative comments. Heterogeneity in tools, outcome measures, and methodologic approach precluded meta-analysis. Five of the nine studies reported a difference in outcomes attributed to gender including gender-based differences in traits ascribed to residents, consistency of feedback, and performance measures. CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that gender bias poses a potential threat to the integrity of resident assessment in graduate medical education. Future study is warranted to understand how gender bias manifests in resident assessment, impact on learners and approaches to mitigate this bias.

show abstract

“…Faculty members do comment on students who exhibit questionable professionalism. Ringdahl et al 13 found in the case of ratings of family practice residents that 80 percent of comments were positive and tended to be general in nature. Similar generic and encouraging comments were reported to predominate in a medical technology board situation 14 and a pediatric clerkship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of these studies measured the relationship between comments and outcomes such as board scores. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Other studies examined student ratings and comments of their teachers 15 or prediction of clinical performance from comments on admissions interviews. 16,17 No studies could be located that compared comments and numerical ratings of students in a clinical context.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comments as Part of a Clinical Competency Rating System

Milani¹,

M.S.P.H.

Chambers³

2007

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of comments faculty members make about students' clinical performance and the relationship between comments and numerical scores given at the same time have not been studied in dental education. We developed a coding system for comments volunteered by faculty members to supplement the numerical ratings given as part of an established clinical competency evaluation system. Twenty-two hundred coded comments and their matched numerical ratings from more than 100 faculty members were compared for two classes of 146 and 157 students for four quarters. Thirty-seven percent of comments focused on dental performance, 43 percent on patient interactions, and 20 percent on relationships with faculty members or the clinic system. Forty-eight percent of comments were positive in tone. Where multiple comments were available for the same student in a quarter, 33 percent of them were confirmed by other faculty members; 9 percent were contradicted. Significant bidirectional associations were observed between comments (positive or negative) and numerical ratings in the area of patient interactions. For technical procedures and for interactions with faculty and the clinic, including professional demeanor, significant unidirectional associations predominated. The findings suggest that faculty members assume that students are skilled in these areas and tend to comment when their expectations are not fulfilled. . Reprints will not be available.

show abstract

Evaluation of interns by senior residents and faculty: is there any difference?

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

Performance in the MRCP(UK) Examination 2003–4: analysis of pass rates of UK graduates in relation to self-declared ethnicity and gender

Performance in the MRCP(UK) Examination 2003–4: analysis of pass rates of UK graduates in relation to self-declared ethnicity and gender

Gender Bias in Resident Assessment in Graduate Medical Education: Review of the Literature

Comments as Part of a Clinical Competency Rating System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About