Gendered Expectations: the Impact of Gender, Evaluation Language, and Clinical Setting on Resident Trainee Assessment of Faculty Performance.

Abstract

Gender inequity is pervasive in academic medicine. Factors contributing to these gender disparities must be examined. A significant body of literature indicates men and women are assessed differently in teaching evaluations. However, limited data exist on how faculty gender affects resident evaluation of faculty performance based on the skill being assessed or the clinical practice settings in which the trainee-faculty interaction occurs. Evaluate for gender-based differences in the assessment of general internal medicine (GIM) faculty physicians by trainees in inpatient and outpatient settings. Retrospective cohort study SUBJECTS: Inpatient and outpatient GIM faculty physicians in an Internal Medicine residency training program from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018. Faculty scores on trainee teaching evaluations including overall teaching ability and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies (medical knowledge [MK], patient care [PC], professionalism [PROF], interpersonal and communication skills [ICS], practice-based learning and improvement [PBLI], and systems-based practice [SBP]) based on the institutional faculty assessment form. In total, 3581 evaluations by 445 trainees (55.1% men, 44.9% women) assessing 161 GIM faculty physicians (50.3% men, 49.7% women) were included. Male faculty were rated higher in overall teaching ability (male=4.69 vs. female=4.63, p=0.003) and in four of the six ACGME competencies (MK, PROF, PBLI, and SBP) based on our institutional evaluation form. In the inpatient setting, male faculty were rated more favorably for overall teaching (male = 4.70, female = 4.53, p=<0.001) and across all ACGME competencies. The only observed gender difference in the outpatient setting favored female faculty in PC (male = 4.65, female = 4.71, p=0.01). Male and female GIM faculty performance was assessed differently by trainees. Gender-based differences were impacted by the setting of evaluation, with the greatest difference by gender noted in the inpatient setting.