Alison Riese1, Leah Rappaport, Brian Alverson, Sangshin Park, Randal M Rockney. 1. A. Riese is assistant professor, Department of Pediatrics and Medical Science, Section of Medical Education, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.L. Rappaport is a first-year pediatrics resident, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan.B. Alverson is associate professor, Department of Pediatrics and Medical Science, Section of Medical Education, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.S. Park is postdoctoral research associate, Alpert Medical School of Brown University and Center for International Health Research at Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.R.M. Rockney is professor, Department of Pediatrics, Family Medicine, and Medical Science, Section of Medical Education, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical performance evaluations are major components of medical school clerkship grades. But are they sufficiently objective? This study aimed to determine whether student and evaluator gender is associated with assessment of overall clinical performance. METHOD: This was a retrospective analysis of 4,272 core clerkship clinical performance evaluations by 829 evaluators of 155 third-year students, within the Alpert Medical School grading database for the 2013-2014 academic year. Overall clinical performance, assessed on a three-point scale (meets expectations, above expectations, exceptional), was extracted from each evaluation, as well as evaluator gender, age, training level, department, student gender and age, and length of observation time. Hierarchical ordinal regression modeling was conducted to account for clustering of evaluations. RESULTS: Female students were more likely to receive a better grade than males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.50), and female evaluators awarded lower grades than males (AOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.93), adjusting for department, observation time, and student and evaluator age. The interaction between student and evaluator gender was significant (P = .03), with female evaluators assigning higher grades to female students, while male evaluators' grading did not differ by student gender. Students who spent a short time with evaluators were also more likely to get a lower grade. CONCLUSIONS: A one-year examination of all third-year clerkship clinical performance evaluations at a single institution revealed that male and female evaluators rated male and female students differently, even when accounting for other measured variables.
PURPOSE: Clinical performance evaluations are major components of medical school clerkship grades. But are they sufficiently objective? This study aimed to determine whether student and evaluator gender is associated with assessment of overall clinical performance. METHOD: This was a retrospective analysis of 4,272 core clerkship clinical performance evaluations by 829 evaluators of 155 third-year students, within the Alpert Medical School grading database for the 2013-2014 academic year. Overall clinical performance, assessed on a three-point scale (meets expectations, above expectations, exceptional), was extracted from each evaluation, as well as evaluator gender, age, training level, department, student gender and age, and length of observation time. Hierarchical ordinal regression modeling was conducted to account for clustering of evaluations. RESULTS: Female students were more likely to receive a better grade than males (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.50), and female evaluators awarded lower grades than males (AOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.93), adjusting for department, observation time, and student and evaluator age. The interaction between student and evaluator gender was significant (P = .03), with female evaluators assigning higher grades to female students, while male evaluators' grading did not differ by student gender. Students who spent a short time with evaluators were also more likely to get a lower grade. CONCLUSIONS: A one-year examination of all third-year clerkship clinical performance evaluations at a single institution revealed that male and female evaluators rated male and female students differently, even when accounting for other measured variables.
Authors: Kevin E O'Brien; Robert Ledford; Deborah DeWaay; Farina Klocksieben; Mike Kisielewski; Alfred Burger; Jeff LaRochelle Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Helen Neighbour; Sandra Monteiro; Mark Lee; Yifei Wu; Anthony Levinson; Jonathan Sherbino Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Annabel K Frank; Patricia O'Sullivan; Lynnea M Mills; Virginie Muller-Juge; Karen E Hauer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Nicholas D Hartman; David E Manthey; Lindsay C Strowd; Nicholas M Potisek; Andrea Vallevand; Janet Tooze; Jon Goforth; Kimberly McDonough; Kim L Askew Journal: Med Sci Educ Date: 2021-05-27
Authors: Amiethab A Aiyer; Caroline J Granger; Kyle L McCormick; Cara A Cipriano; Jonathan R Kaplan; Matthew A Varacallo; Seth D Dodds; William N Levine Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 3.020