Magali Fassiotto1, Jie Li2, Yvonne Maldonado3, Nishita Kothary4. 1. Office of Faculty Development and Diversity, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. Electronic address: magali.fassiotto@stanford.edu. 2. Office of Graduate Medical Education, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California. 3. Office of Faculty Development and Diversity, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California; Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California. 4. Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Similar to women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics disciplines, women in medicine are subject to negative stereotyping when they do not adhere to their sex-role expectations. These biases may vary by specialty, largely dependent on the gender's representation in that specialty. Thus, females in male-dominated surgical specialties are especially at risk of stereotype threat. Herein, we present the role of gender expectations using trainee evaluations of physician faculty at a single academic center, over a 5-year period (2010-2014). DESIGN: Using Graduate Medical Education evaluation data of physician faculty from MedHub, we examined the differences in evaluation scores for male and female physicians within specialties that have traditionally had low female representation (e.g., surgical fields) compared to those with average or high female representation (e.g., pediatrics). SETTING: Stanford Medicine residents and fellows' MedHub ratings of their physician faculty from 2010 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3648 evaluations across 1066 physician faculty. RESULTS: Overall, female physicians received lower median scores than their male counterparts across all specialties. When using regression analyses controlling for race, age, rank, and specialty-specific characteristics, the negative effect persists only for female physicians in specialties with low female representation. CONCLUSIONS: This finding suggests that female physicians in traditionally male-dominated specialties may face different criteria based on sex-role expectations when being evaluated by trainees. As trainee evaluations play an important role in career advancement decisions, dictate perceptions of quality within academic medical centers and affect overall job satisfaction, we propose that these differences in evaluations based merely on gender stereotypes could account, in part, for the narrowing pipeline of women promoted to higher ranks in academic medicine.
OBJECTIVE: Similar to women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics disciplines, women in medicine are subject to negative stereotyping when they do not adhere to their sex-role expectations. These biases may vary by specialty, largely dependent on the gender's representation in that specialty. Thus, females in male-dominated surgical specialties are especially at risk of stereotype threat. Herein, we present the role of gender expectations using trainee evaluations of physician faculty at a single academic center, over a 5-year period (2010-2014). DESIGN: Using Graduate Medical Education evaluation data of physician faculty from MedHub, we examined the differences in evaluation scores for male and female physicians within specialties that have traditionally had low female representation (e.g., surgical fields) compared to those with average or high female representation (e.g., pediatrics). SETTING: Stanford Medicine residents and fellows' MedHub ratings of their physician faculty from 2010 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3648 evaluations across 1066 physician faculty. RESULTS: Overall, female physicians received lower median scores than their male counterparts across all specialties. When using regression analyses controlling for race, age, rank, and specialty-specific characteristics, the negative effect persists only for female physicians in specialties with low female representation. CONCLUSIONS: This finding suggests that female physicians in traditionally male-dominated specialties may face different criteria based on sex-role expectations when being evaluated by trainees. As trainee evaluations play an important role in career advancement decisions, dictate perceptions of quality within academic medical centers and affect overall job satisfaction, we propose that these differences in evaluations based merely on gender stereotypes could account, in part, for the narrowing pipeline of women promoted to higher ranks in academic medicine.
Authors: Virginia Sheffield; Sarah Hartley; R Brent Stansfield; Megan Mack; Staci Blackburn; Valerie M Vaughn; Lauren Heidemann; Robert Chang; Jennifer Reilly Lukela Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-08-17 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Jessica C Babal; Sarah Webber; Carrie L Nacht; Kirstin A M Nackers; Kristin Tiedt; Ann Allen; Brittany J Allen; Michelle M Kelly Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2022-04-14
Authors: Fernanda Costa Sampaio Silva; Monique Magnavita Borba da Fonseca Cerqueira; Magno Conceição das Mercês; Flávia Magalhães Silveira Magella; Bárbara Beatriz Couto Ruivo; Marita von Rautenfeld; Roque Aras Journal: J Vasc Bras Date: 2021-08-13
Authors: Élan Burton; Brenda Flores; Barbara Jerome; Michael Baiocchi; Yan Min; Yvonne A Maldonado; Magali Fassiotto Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-05-02
Authors: Elena P Padilla; Christopher C Stahl; Sarah A Jung; Alexandra A Rosser; Patrick B Schwartz; Taylor Aiken; Alexandra W Acher; Daniel E Abbott; Jacob A Greenberg; Rebecca M Minter Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 13.787