• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Race and Gender Bias in Internal Medicine Program Director Letters of Recommendation.内科住院医师培训项目主任推荐信中的种族和性别偏见。
J Grad Med Educ. 2021 Jun;13(3):335-344. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-20-00929.1. Epub 2021 Apr 15.
2
Gender Bias in Surgical Oncology Fellowship Recommendation Letters: Gaining Progress.外科肿瘤学研究员推荐函中的性别偏见:取得进展。
J Surg Educ. 2021 May-Jun;78(3):866-874. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.08.049. Epub 2020 Dec 13.
3
Letters of recommendation for pediatric surgery fellowship: Analysis of linguistic differences based on gender of the applicant.儿科外科研修推荐信:基于申请人性别分析语言差异。
J Pediatr Surg. 2021 Aug;56(8):1299-1304. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2021.02.049. Epub 2021 Mar 4.
4
Linguistic Differences by Gender in Letters of Recommendation for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship Applicants.母胎医学专科住院医师申请推荐信中的性别语言差异
Am J Perinatol. 2024 May;41(S 01):e1955-e1961. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1770148. Epub 2023 Jun 19.
5
Linguistic Differences by Gender in Letters of Recommendation for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellowship Applicants.妇科微创外科研究员申请推荐信中性别导致的语言差异。
J Surg Educ. 2022 Jul-Aug;79(4):928-934. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2022.02.007. Epub 2022 Mar 4.
6
Do gender differences exist in letters of recommendation for reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship?推荐信中是否存在生殖内分泌与不孕不育研究员项目的性别差异?
Fertil Steril. 2023 Dec;120(6):1234-1242. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.09.018. Epub 2023 Sep 28.
7
Gender and Language in Letters of Recommendation for Obstetrics and Gynecology Fellowship Applications.推荐信中的性别与语言:妇产科住院医师申请
J Surg Educ. 2023 Oct;80(10):1424-1431. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2023.07.003. Epub 2023 Aug 12.
8
Do gender and racial differences exist in letters of recommendation for obstetrics and gynecology residency applicants?推荐信中是否存在妇产科住院医师申请人的性别和种族差异?
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Nov;225(5):554.e1-554.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.08.033. Epub 2021 Sep 8.
9
Words Used in Letters of Recommendation for Pediatric Residency Applicants: Demographic Differences and Impact on Interviews.儿科住院医师申请推荐信中使用的词汇:人口统计学差异及其对面试的影响。
Acad Pediatr. 2023 Nov-Dec;23(8):1614-1619. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2023.02.012. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
10
Identifying Gender and Racial Bias in Pediatric Fellowship Letters of Recommendation: Do Word Choices Influence Interview Decisions?识别儿科住院医师推荐信中的性别和种族偏见:用词是否会影响面试决策?
J Pediatr. 2024 Feb;265:113843. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113843. Epub 2023 Nov 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Differences in language used to describe racial groups in emergency medicine standardized letter of evaluation.急诊医学标准化评估信中用于描述种族群体的语言差异。
AEM Educ Train. 2025 May 19;9(3):e70054. doi: 10.1002/aet2.70054. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
Are We There Yet? Equity in the Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Application Process.我们到了吗?肺科与重症医学专科住院医师申请过程中的公平性
ATS Sch. 2025 Mar;6(1):4-7. doi: 10.34197/ats-scholar.2025-0027ED.
3
Investigating the Road to Equity: A Scoping Review of Solutions to Mitigate Implicit Bias in Assessment within Medical Education.探索公平之路:医学教育评估中减轻内隐偏见的解决方案综述
Perspect Med Educ. 2025 Mar 3;14(1):92-106. doi: 10.5334/pme.1716. eCollection 2025.
4
The Impact of Applicant Sex on Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Letters of Recommendation: A Multisite Study.申请人性别对肺科与重症医学专科住院医师推荐信的影响:一项多中心研究
ATS Sch. 2025 Mar;6(1):65-73. doi: 10.34197/ats-scholar.2024-0074OC. Epub 2025 Jan 14.
5
Decoding the Reference Letter: Strategies to Reduce Unintentional Gender Bias in Letters of Recommendation.解读推荐信:减少推荐信中无意识性别偏见的策略。
MedEdPORTAL. 2024 Jul 5;20:11419. doi: 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.11419. eCollection 2024.
6
Measuring and Predicting Faculty Consensus Rankings of Standardized Letters of Evaluation.测量和预测标准化推荐信中教师共识排名。
J Grad Med Educ. 2024 Feb;16(1):51-58. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-22-00901.1. Epub 2024 Feb 17.
7
Gender influences resident physicians' perception of an employee-to-employee recognition program: a mixed methods study.性别影响住院医师对员工间认可计划的看法:一项混合方法研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Feb 1;24(1):109. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05083-0.
8
Evaluation of Family Medicine Residency Programs for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Milestones.评价家庭医学住院医师培训计划的多样性、公平性和包容性里程碑。
Fam Med. 2024 Jan;56(1):24-29. doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2023.919199. Epub 2023 Oct 17.
9
Selection and Recruitment Strategies among Competitive Pediatric Training Programs and the Impact of Diversity.竞争激烈的儿科培训项目中的选拔和招募策略以及多样性的影响。
Acad Pediatr. 2024 Mar;24(2):338-346. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2023.09.010. Epub 2023 Sep 23.
10
Gender and culture bias in letters of recommendation for computer science and data science masters programs.推荐计算机科学和数据科学硕士项目的推荐信中的性别和文化偏见。
Sci Rep. 2023 Sep 1;13(1):14367. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41564-w.

本文引用的文献

1
Trends in Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Internal Medicine Subspecialty Fellowships From 2006 to 2018.2006年至2018年内科专科住院医师培训中的种族和族裔多样性趋势
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Feb 5;3(2):e1920482. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.20482.
2
Gender and Racial Bias in Radiology Residency Letters of Recommendation.影像学住院医师推荐信中的性别和种族偏见。
J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 Jan;17(1 Pt A):64-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.08.008. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
3
Let's Face It: We Are Biased, and It Should Not Be That Way.面对现实吧:我们有偏见,而情况不该如此。
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 May;34(5):649-651. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-04923-w.
4
Influence of Gender on Surgical Residency Applicants' Recommendation Letters.性别对外科住院医师申请人推荐信的影响。
J Am Coll Surg. 2019 Apr;228(4):356-365.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.12.020. Epub 2019 Jan 8.
5
Gendered Differences in Letters of Recommendation for Transplant Surgery Fellowship Applicants.移植外科研究员申请人推荐信中的性别差异。
J Surg Educ. 2019 Mar-Apr;76(2):427-432. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.08.021. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
6
Internal medicine fellowship directors' perspectives on the quality and utility of letters conforming to residency program director letter of recommendation guidelines.内科住院医师培训项目主任对符合住院医师培训项目主任推荐信指南的信件质量和效用的看法。
J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2018 Aug 23;8(4):173-176. doi: 10.1080/20009666.2018.1500424. eCollection 2018.
7
Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization.定性研究中的饱和度:探索其概念化与操作化
Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893-1907. doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8. Epub 2017 Sep 14.
8
Differences in words used to describe racial and gender groups in Medical Student Performance Evaluations.医学生绩效评估中用于描述种族和性别群体的词汇差异。
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 9;12(8):e0181659. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181659. eCollection 2017.
9
Use of standardized letters of recommendation for otolaryngology head and neck surgery residency and the impact of gender.标准化推荐信在耳鼻咽喉头颈外科住院医师培训中的应用及性别影响
Laryngoscope. 2017 Dec;127(12):2738-2745. doi: 10.1002/lary.26619. Epub 2017 Aug 8.
10
Guidelines for a Standardized Fellowship Letter of Recommendation.标准化进修推荐信指南。
Am J Med. 2017 May;130(5):606-611. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.01.017. Epub 2017 Feb 9.

内科住院医师培训项目主任推荐信中的种族和性别偏见。

Race and Gender Bias in Internal Medicine Program Director Letters of Recommendation.

作者信息

Zhang Neil, Blissett Sarah, Anderson David, O'Sullivan Patricia, Qasim Atif

机构信息

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.

出版信息

J Grad Med Educ. 2021 Jun;13(3):335-344. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-20-00929.1. Epub 2021 Apr 15.

DOI:10.4300/JGME-D-20-00929.1
PMID:34178258
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8207902/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVE

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

摘要

背景

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。

目的

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。

方法

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。

结果

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。

结论

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。