Gender and Letters of Recommendation: A Linguistic Comparison of the Impact of Gender on General Surgery Residency Applicants✰

French, Judith C.; Zolin, Samuel J.; Lampert, Erika J.; Aiello, Alexandra; Bencsath, Kalman P.; Ritter, Kaitlin A.; Strong, Andrew T.; Lipman, Jeremy M.; Valente, Michael; Prabhu, Ajita S.

doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.12.007

Cited by 48 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Higher numbers represent increased use. 3 Gender bias as calculated by http://slowe. github.io/genderbias/.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, social science research has demonstrated that, not only do LORs tend to be longer for men than for women, but they contain more standout adjectives such as "superb," "outstanding," and "remarkable" as well as more research-related descriptors [2]. Recently published studies in general surgery [3,4], transplant surgery [5], otolaryngology [6,7], and emergency medicine [8] show differences in both the length of LORs as well as the terms used to describe men and women. This trend does not end after residency acceptance; LORs submitted as part of the application package to join as medical school faculty have also shown gender biases [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerical value for each domain represents the frequency with which terms contained in that particular domain appear within the letter of recommendation. Higher numbers represent increased use 3. Gender bias as calculated by http://slowe.github.io/genderbias/.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to investigate whether implicit linguistic biases exist in letters of recommendation (LORs) for applicants to radiation oncology (RO) residency. LORs ( n = 487) written for applicants ( n = 125) invited to interview at a single RO residency program from the 2015 to 2019 application cycles were included for analysis. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software was used to evaluate LORs for length and a dictionary of predetermined themes. Language was evaluated for gender bias using a publicly available gender bias calculator. Non-parametric tests were used to compare linguistic domain scores. The median number of the LORs per applicant was 4 (range 3–5). No significant differences by applicant gender were detected in LIWC score domains or gender bias calculator ( P > 0.05). However, LORs for applicants from racial/ethnic backgrounds underrepresented in medicine were less likely to include standout descriptors ( P = 0.008). Male writers were less likely to describe applicant characteristics related to patient care ( P < 0.0001) and agentic personality ( P = 0.006). LORs written by RO were shorter ( P < 0.0001) and included fewer standout descriptors ( P = 0.014) but were also more likely to include statements regarding applicant desirability ( P = 0.045) and research ( P = 0.008). While language was globally male-biased, assistant professors were less likely than associate professors ( P = 0.0064) and full professors ( P = 0.023) to use male-biased language. Significant linguistic differences were observed in RO residency LORs, suggesting that implicit biases related to both applicants and letter writers may exist. Recognition, and ideally eradication, of such biases are crucial for fair and equitable evaluation of a diverse applicant pool of RO residency candidates. Electronic supplementary material The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13187-020-01907-x.

show abstract

“…Higher numbers represent increased use. 3 Gender bias as calculated by http://slowe. github.io/genderbias/.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[27][28][29] Black students are more likely to attend institutions that do not have a radiation oncology department, therefore, less likely to have exposure to research and fewer networking opportunities provided by the home program faculty. 9 Moreover, implicit linguistic bias may exist in letters of recommendation for radiation oncology residency candidates as well as with other postgraduate training programs [30][31][32][33] URM individuals have been found to have lower USMLE test scores as compared to White individuals. 34 It is important to consider whether these lower scores might be a result of biases in testing.…”

Section: Case #2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Black students are more likely to attend institutions that do not have a radiation oncology department; therefore, they are less likely to have exposure to research and fewer networking opportunities provided by the home program faculty. 9 Moreover, implicit linguistic bias may exist in letters of recommendation for radiation oncology residency candidates as well as with other postgraduate training programs 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 …”

Section: Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating Implicit Bias in Radiation Oncology

Diaz

Suneja

Jagsi

et al. 2021

Advances in Radiation Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

show abstract

Sex Disparities in Ophthalmology From Training Through Practice

Rousta,

Hussein,

Kohly

2024

JAMA Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceSex-based research in medicine has revealed inequities against females on almost every metric at almost every career stage; ophthalmology is no exception.ObjectiveTo systematically review the experiences of females in ophthalmology (FiO) from training through practice in high-income countries (HICs).Evidence ReviewA systematic review of English-language studies, published between January 1990 and May 2022, relating to FiO in HICs was performed. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were searched, as well as the Journal of Academic Ophthalmology as it was not indexed in the searched databases. Studies were organized by theme at each career stage, starting in medical school when an interest in ophthalmology is expressed, and extending up to retirement.FindingsA total of 91 studies, 87 cross-sectional and 4 cohort, were included. In medical school, mentorship and recruitment of female students into ophthalmology was influenced by sex bias, with fewer females identifying with ophthalmologist mentors and gender stereotypes perpetuated in reference letters written by both male and female referees. In residency, females had unequal learning opportunities, with lower surgical case volumes than male trainees and fewer females pursued fellowships in lucrative subspecialties. In practice, female ophthalmologists had lower incomes, less academic success, and poorer representation in leadership roles. Female ophthalmologists had a greater scholarly impact factor than their male counterparts, but this was only after approximately 30 years of publication experience. Pervasive throughout all stages of training and practice was the experience of greater sexual harassment among females from both patients and colleagues. Despite these disparities, some studies found that females reported equal overall career satisfaction rating with males in ophthalmology, whereas others suggested higher burnout rates.Conclusions and RelevanceOphthalmology is approaching sex parity, however, the increase in the proportion of females in ophthalmology had not translated to an increase in female representation in leadership positions. Sex disparities persisted across many domains including recruitment, training, practice patterns, academic productivity, and income. Interventions may improve sex equity in the field.

show abstract

Gender and Letters of Recommendation: A Linguistic Comparison of the Impact of Gender on General Surgery Residency Applicants✰

Cited by 48 publications

References 15 publications

Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019

Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019

Mitigating Implicit Bias in Radiation Oncology

Sex Disparities in Ophthalmology From Training Through Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About