急诊科住院医师反馈中性别认同与医内未充分代表认同的关系

IF 1.2 4区医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE

Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.11.019

Ryan F. Coughlin MD , Jessica Bod MD , Shacelles Bonner MD , Katarzyna Gore MD , Alina Tsyrulnik MD , Dylan Devlin MD , Nickolas Srica MD , David Della-Giustina MD , Manali Phadke MS , James Dziura PhD , Katja Goldflam MD , Michael Gottlieb MD

{"title":"急诊科住院医师反馈中性别认同与医内未充分代表认同的关系","authors":"Ryan F. Coughlin MD , Jessica Bod MD , Shacelles Bonner MD , Katarzyna Gore MD , Alina Tsyrulnik MD , Dylan Devlin MD , Nickolas Srica MD , David Della-Giustina MD , Manali Phadke MS , James Dziura PhD , Katja Goldflam MD , Michael Gottlieb MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.11.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Effective delivery of feedback is critical to enhancing learning, clinical performance, and professional growth among residents. However, disparities may exist in how feedback is given to different learner groups.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine if resident gender or underrepresented–in medicine (UiM) identity influenced the likelihood of receiving feedback.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This was a retrospective study of feedback delivery at an academic, 4-year, emergency medicine residency over a 28-month period. Generalized estimating equation models were performed to assess the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident and assessor gender identity and UiM identity, or resident-assessor gender identity or UiM identity concordance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Resident gender identity (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.84–1.11) and UiM identity (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.81–1.27) were not associated with differences in receiving written feedback. Analysis among those who received face-to-face feedback revealed no significant differences in feedback delivery method by gender (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.83–1.52) or UiM identity (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.97–2.02). There were no significant differences in the use of deliberate practice (gender OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81–1.09 and UiM OR 1.009; 95% CI 0.77–1.33). Neither faculty-resident gender concordance (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.83–1.08) nor faculty-resident UiM concordance (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.92–1.24) were significantly associated with receiving written feedback.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In this single-center, retrospective study, there were no significant differences in the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, self-reported feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident gender identity and resident UiM identity, or resident-faculty gender or UiM concordance. Further research with larger, multisite datasets is needed to draw more definitive conclusions regarding disparities in these areas on a larger scale.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16085,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"72 ","pages":"Pages 97-103"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relationship Between Gender Identity and Underrepresented-In-Medicine Identity on Emergency Medicine Resident Feedback\",\"authors\":\"Ryan F. Coughlin MD , Jessica Bod MD , Shacelles Bonner MD , Katarzyna Gore MD , Alina Tsyrulnik MD , Dylan Devlin MD , Nickolas Srica MD , David Della-Giustina MD , Manali Phadke MS , James Dziura PhD , Katja Goldflam MD , Michael Gottlieb MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.11.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Effective delivery of feedback is critical to enhancing learning, clinical performance, and professional growth among residents. However, disparities may exist in how feedback is given to different learner groups.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine if resident gender or underrepresented–in medicine (UiM) identity influenced the likelihood of receiving feedback.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This was a retrospective study of feedback delivery at an academic, 4-year, emergency medicine residency over a 28-month period. Generalized estimating equation models were performed to assess the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident and assessor gender identity and UiM identity, or resident-assessor gender identity or UiM identity concordance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Resident gender identity (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.84–1.11) and UiM identity (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.81–1.27) were not associated with differences in receiving written feedback. Analysis among those who received face-to-face feedback revealed no significant differences in feedback delivery method by gender (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.83–1.52) or UiM identity (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.97–2.02). There were no significant differences in the use of deliberate practice (gender OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81–1.09 and UiM OR 1.009; 95% CI 0.77–1.33). Neither faculty-resident gender concordance (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.83–1.08) nor faculty-resident UiM concordance (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.92–1.24) were significantly associated with receiving written feedback.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In this single-center, retrospective study, there were no significant differences in the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, self-reported feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident gender identity and resident UiM identity, or resident-faculty gender or UiM concordance. Further research with larger, multisite datasets is needed to draw more definitive conclusions regarding disparities in these areas on a larger scale.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"72 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 97-103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467924003639\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467924003639","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

有效的反馈对于提高住院医生的学习、临床表现和专业成长至关重要。然而，在如何向不同的学习者群体提供反馈方面可能存在差异。目的确定住院医师性别或医学代表性不足（UiM）身份是否影响接受反馈的可能性。方法回顾性研究4年急诊医学住院医师28个月的反馈分娩情况。采用广义估计方程模型来评估接收反馈、反馈传递、反馈内容或使用刻意练习的几率，这些几率与住院医师和评估员的性别认同和UiM身份，或住院医师和评估员的性别认同或UiM身份一致性有关。结果居民性别认同(OR 0.96；95% CI 0.84-1.11)和UiM一致性(OR 1.02；95% CI 0.81-1.27)与接受书面反馈的差异无关。对接受面对面反馈的学生进行分析，发现性别在反馈传递方式上没有显著差异(OR 1.13；95% CI 0.83-1.52)或UiM一致性(or 1.40；95% ci 0.97-2.02)。在刻意练习的使用上无显著差异(性别OR 0.94；95% CI 0.81-1.09, UiM OR 1.009；95% ci 0.77-1.33)。教师-住院医师性别一致性(OR 0.95；95% CI 0.83-1.08)和教职员工的一致性(OR 1.07；95% CI 0.92-1.24)与接受书面反馈显著相关。结论在这项单中心回顾性研究中，在住院医师性别认同、住院医师身份认同、住院医师与教师性别认同、住院医师与教师性别认同或住院医师身份认同方面，接受反馈、反馈传递、自我报告反馈内容或使用刻意练习的几率均无显著差异。需要使用更大的多站点数据集进行进一步研究，以便在更大范围内对这些地区的差异得出更明确的结论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Relationship Between Gender Identity and Underrepresented-In-Medicine Identity on Emergency Medicine Resident Feedback

Background

Effective delivery of feedback is critical to enhancing learning, clinical performance, and professional growth among residents. However, disparities may exist in how feedback is given to different learner groups.

Objective

To determine if resident gender or underrepresented–in medicine (UiM) identity influenced the likelihood of receiving feedback.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of feedback delivery at an academic, 4-year, emergency medicine residency over a 28-month period. Generalized estimating equation models were performed to assess the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident and assessor gender identity and UiM identity, or resident-assessor gender identity or UiM identity concordance.

Results

Resident gender identity (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.84–1.11) and UiM identity (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.81–1.27) were not associated with differences in receiving written feedback. Analysis among those who received face-to-face feedback revealed no significant differences in feedback delivery method by gender (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.83–1.52) or UiM identity (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.97–2.02). There were no significant differences in the use of deliberate practice (gender OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81–1.09 and UiM OR 1.009; 95% CI 0.77–1.33). Neither faculty-resident gender concordance (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.83–1.08) nor faculty-resident UiM concordance (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.92–1.24) were significantly associated with receiving written feedback.

Conclusion

In this single-center, retrospective study, there were no significant differences in the odds of receiving feedback, feedback delivery, self-reported feedback content, or use of deliberate practice with respect to resident gender identity and resident UiM identity, or resident-faculty gender or UiM concordance. Further research with larger, multisite datasets is needed to draw more definitive conclusions regarding disparities in these areas on a larger scale.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

6.70%

发文量

339

审稿时长

2-4 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Emergency Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to both the academic and practicing emergency physician. JEM, published monthly, contains research papers and clinical studies as well as articles focusing on the training of emergency physicians and on the practice of emergency medicine. The Journal features the following sections: • Original Contributions • Clinical Communications: Pediatric, Adult, OB/GYN • Selected Topics: Toxicology, Prehospital Care, The Difficult Airway, Aeromedical Emergencies, Disaster Medicine, Cardiology Commentary, Emergency Radiology, Critical Care, Sports Medicine, Wound Care • Techniques and Procedures • Technical Tips • Clinical Laboratory in Emergency Medicine • Pharmacology in Emergency Medicine • Case Presentations of the Harvard Emergency Medicine Residency • Visual Diagnosis in Emergency Medicine • Medical Classics • Emergency Forum • Editorial(s) • Letters to the Editor • Education • Administration of Emergency Medicine • International Emergency Medicine • Computers in Emergency Medicine • Violence: Recognition, Management, and Prevention • Ethics • Humanities and Medicine • American Academy of Emergency Medicine • AAEM Medical Student Forum • Book and Other Media Reviews • Calendar of Events • Abstracts • Trauma Reports • Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine