Cheng Tiffany, Curley Michael, Barmettler Anne
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 3332 Rochambeau Ave, 3rd Floor, NY 10467 Bronx, USA.
Med Sci Educ. 2022 Sep 12;32(5):1143-1147. doi: 10.1007/s40670-022-01636-4. eCollection 2022 Oct.
Inadequate diversity in dermatologic images has been associated with diagnostic delays and poorer health outcomes. This underrepresentation of darker skin tones has also been demonstrated across various fields of medicine, including rheumatology, urology, and in the COVID-19 pandemic. The distribution of skin tones has not been examined in educational ophthalmology texts. The authors aimed to quantify the representation of skin tones across three leading ophthalmology textbooks.
Two independent investigators utilized the Fitzpatrick's skin phototype scale to code images containing skin as either "light" (Fitz. I-IV) or "dark" (Fitz. V-VI) in three fundamental ophthalmology textbooks: (Salmon and Kanski), (Yanoff and Duker), and the 13 texts by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Images without discernible skin color were excluded.
Of the 9766 images reviewed, 2305 images met inclusion criteria. The three textbooks combined were found to have 2123 (92.1%) images of light skin tones and 182 images (7.9%) of dark skin tones. When compared to national data that found 12.6% of individuals to have dark skin tones, the proportion of images with darker skin tones in ophthalmology textbooks was statistically significantly lower ( (1, = 4996) = 211.7, < 0.001).
Darker skin tones are statistically significantly underrepresented in textbooks that are central to education of trainees in ophthalmology. Acknowledgement and inclusion of skin tone diversity in ophthalmology educational materials are necessary to ensure that physicians in the field are equipped with the knowledge and training to provide the highest level of care to all patients.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01636-4.
皮肤科图像缺乏多样性与诊断延迟和较差的健康结果相关。在包括风湿病学、泌尿学以及新冠疫情在内的各个医学领域,深色皮肤色调的代表性不足也已得到证实。教育性眼科教材中尚未对肤色分布进行研究。作者旨在量化三本主要眼科教材中肤色的呈现情况。
两名独立研究人员使用菲茨帕特里克皮肤光型量表,对三本基础眼科教材(《萨尔蒙与坎斯基》《矢野与杜克》以及美国眼科学会的13篇文本)中包含皮肤的图像编码为“浅色”(菲茨I - IV型)或“深色”(菲茨V - VI型)。排除无明显肤色的图像。
在审查的9766张图像中,2305张图像符合纳入标准。发现三本教材合起来有2123张(92.1%)浅色皮肤色调的图像和182张(7.9%)深色皮肤色调的图像。与发现12.6%的个体为深色皮肤色调的全国数据相比,眼科教材中深色皮肤色调图像的比例在统计学上显著更低(χ²(1, N = 4996) = 211.7,P < 0.001)。
在眼科培训学员的核心教材中,深色皮肤色调在统计学上显著缺乏代表性。在眼科教育材料中承认并纳入肤色多样性对于确保该领域的医生具备为所有患者提供最高水平护理的知识和培训是必要的。
在线版本包含可在10.1007/s40670 - 022 - 01636 - 4获取的补充材料。