Zhang Neil, Blissett Sarah, Anderson David, O'Sullivan Patricia, Qasim Atif
is Clinical Instructor, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
is Assistant Professor, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, and Centre for Education Research and Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
J Grad Med Educ. 2021 Jun;13(3):335-344. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-20-00929.1. Epub 2021 Apr 15.
While program director (PD) letters of recommendation (LOR) are subject to bias, especially against those underrepresented in medicine, these letters are one of the most important factors in fellowship selection. Bias manifests in LOR in a number of ways, including biased use of agentic and communal terms, doubt raising language, and description of career trajectory. To reduce bias, specialty organizations have recommended standardized PD LOR.
This study examined PD LOR for applicants to a cardiology fellowship program to determine the mechanism of how bias is expressed and whether the 2017 Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine (AAIM) guidelines reduce bias.
Fifty-six LOR from applicants selected to interview at a cardiology fellowship during the 2019 and 2020 application cycles were selected using convenience sampling. LOR for underrepresented (Black, Latinx, women) and non-underrepresented applicants were analyzed using directed qualitative content analysis. Two coders used an iteratively refined codebook to code the transcripts. Data were analyzed using outputs from these codes, analytical memos were maintained, and themes summarized.
With AAIM guidelines, there appeared to be reduced use of communal language for underrepresented applicants, which may represent less bias. However, in both LOR adherent and not adherent to the guidelines, underrepresented applicants were still more likely to be described using communal language, doubt raising language, and career trajectory bias.
PDs used language in a biased way to describe underrepresented applicants in LOR. The AAIM guidelines reduced but did not eliminate this bias. We provide recommendations to PDs and the AAIM on how to continue to work to reduce this bias.
虽然项目主任(PD)的推荐信(LOR)容易受到偏见影响,尤其是对医学领域中代表性不足的群体,但这些推荐信是研究员选拔中最重要的因素之一。偏见在推荐信中以多种方式表现出来,包括对能动性和社群性词汇的偏见性使用、引发质疑的语言以及职业轨迹描述。为减少偏见,专业组织建议采用标准化的项目主任推荐信。
本研究检查了心脏病学研究员项目申请人的项目主任推荐信,以确定偏见表现的机制,以及2017年学术内科联盟(AAIM)指南是否能减少偏见。
采用便利抽样法,从2019年和2020年申请周期中被选中参加心脏病学研究员面试的申请人的56封推荐信中进行选取。使用定向定性内容分析法,对代表性不足(黑人、拉丁裔、女性)和非代表性不足申请人的推荐信进行分析。两名编码员使用经过反复完善的编码手册对抄本进行编码。利用这些编码的输出结果进行数据分析,保留分析备忘录,并总结主题。
根据AAIM指南,代表性不足的申请人使用社群性语言的情况似乎有所减少,这可能意味着偏见减少。然而,在遵循和未遵循指南的推荐信中,代表性不足的申请人仍更有可能被用社群性语言、引发质疑的语言以及职业轨迹偏见来描述。
项目主任在推荐信中以有偏见的方式使用语言来描述代表性不足的申请人。AAIM指南减少了但并未消除这种偏见。我们就如何继续努力减少这种偏见向项目主任和AAIM提供了建议。