Nonresponse Bias Confounds Self-Reported Mistreatment by Diverse Physician Associate Students.

Q2 Health Professions
Marcia Bouton, Charlotte Bolch, Nicholas Hudak, Dominique Frias-Sarmiento, Bettie Coplan
{"title":"Nonresponse Bias Confounds Self-Reported Mistreatment by Diverse Physician Associate Students.","authors":"Marcia Bouton, Charlotte Bolch, Nicholas Hudak, Dominique Frias-Sarmiento, Bettie Coplan","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate whether physician assistant/associate (PA) students' sociodemographic factors were predictors of risk for mistreatment. A secondary analysis aimed to evaluate whether sociodemographic features were evenly distributed among respondents who answered mistreatment items.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data originated from the PA Education Association End of Program Surveys (2018, 2019, 2021, and 2022). Independent variables were gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Using logistic regression, odds ratios were calculated for 2 separate dependent variables: whether respondents experienced mistreatment and whether respondents completed mistreatment items.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surveys included 11,461 respondents, 3218 (28.1%) of whom experienced mistreatment; however, 3258 (28.4%) of respondents did not answer any mistreatment items. Analysis showed statistically significant sociodemographic factors for risk for mistreatment, but the model had poor fit (P-value = 0; receiver operating characteristic [ROC] 0.553), possibly related to partial nonresponse bias. Completing mistreatment items was statistically significantly more likely for respondents who indicated they were gay or lesbian (odds ratio [OR] 1.52) or bisexual (OR 1.82) and less likely for respondents who indicated they were male (OR 0.68), sexual orientation \"I don't know/prefer not to answer\" (OR 0.65), Hispanic (OR 0.79), or not White (OR 0.49).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The sociodemographic factors evaluated were inadequate to predict mistreatment of PA students, but sociodemographic factors were associated with willingness to complete mistreatment questions. Qualitative research is needed to determine why respondents who are male, Hispanic, or not White are reluctant to complete mistreatment questions. Findings could inform survey improvements to more accurately measure health professions student mistreatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate whether physician assistant/associate (PA) students' sociodemographic factors were predictors of risk for mistreatment. A secondary analysis aimed to evaluate whether sociodemographic features were evenly distributed among respondents who answered mistreatment items.

Methods: Data originated from the PA Education Association End of Program Surveys (2018, 2019, 2021, and 2022). Independent variables were gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Using logistic regression, odds ratios were calculated for 2 separate dependent variables: whether respondents experienced mistreatment and whether respondents completed mistreatment items.

Results: Surveys included 11,461 respondents, 3218 (28.1%) of whom experienced mistreatment; however, 3258 (28.4%) of respondents did not answer any mistreatment items. Analysis showed statistically significant sociodemographic factors for risk for mistreatment, but the model had poor fit (P-value = 0; receiver operating characteristic [ROC] 0.553), possibly related to partial nonresponse bias. Completing mistreatment items was statistically significantly more likely for respondents who indicated they were gay or lesbian (odds ratio [OR] 1.52) or bisexual (OR 1.82) and less likely for respondents who indicated they were male (OR 0.68), sexual orientation "I don't know/prefer not to answer" (OR 0.65), Hispanic (OR 0.79), or not White (OR 0.49).

Discussion: The sociodemographic factors evaluated were inadequate to predict mistreatment of PA students, but sociodemographic factors were associated with willingness to complete mistreatment questions. Qualitative research is needed to determine why respondents who are male, Hispanic, or not White are reluctant to complete mistreatment questions. Findings could inform survey improvements to more accurately measure health professions student mistreatment.

非反应偏倚混淆了不同医师助理学生自我报告的虐待。
前言:本研究旨在评估医师助理/助理(PA)学生的社会人口学因素是否为虐待风险的预测因素。第二个分析旨在评估社会人口学特征在回答虐待项目的受访者中是否均匀分布。方法:数据来源于PA教育协会项目结束调查(2018年、2019年、2021年和2022年)。独立变量为性别、种族、民族和性取向。使用逻辑回归,计算了2个独立因变量的比值比:受访者是否经历过虐待和受访者是否完成了虐待项目。结果:调查包括11461名受访者,其中3218人(28.1%)经历过虐待;然而,3258名(28.4%)受访者没有回答任何虐待问题。分析显示,社会人口学因素对虐待风险有统计学意义,但模型拟合较差(p值= 0;受试者工作特征[ROC] 0.553),可能与部分无反应偏倚有关。在统计上,表明自己是男同性恋或女同性恋(比值比[or] 1.52)或双性恋(比值比[or] 1.82)的受访者更有可能完成虐待项目,而表明自己是男性(比值比为0.68)、性取向“我不知道/不喜欢回答”(比值比为0.65)、西班牙裔(比值比为0.79)或非白人(比值比为0.49)的受访者更不可能完成虐待项目。讨论:评估的社会人口因素不足以预测PA学生的虐待,但社会人口因素与完成虐待问题的意愿有关。需要进行定性研究,以确定为什么男性、西班牙裔或非白人受访者不愿完成虐待问题。研究结果可以为改进调查提供信息,以更准确地衡量卫生专业学生的虐待。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信