{"id":15451,"date":"2019-01-31T07:00:32","date_gmt":"2019-01-31T12:00:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/feminem.org\/?p=15451"},"modified":"2019-03-06T10:49:12","modified_gmt":"2019-03-06T15:49:12","slug":"making-it-to-the-milestones","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/feminem.org\/2019\/01\/31\/making-it-to-the-milestones\/","title":{"rendered":"Making it to the Milestones"},"content":{"rendered":"
Congratulations to Dr. Michelle Romeo\u00a0 for her winning submission to the Essentials of Emergency Medicine Fellowship Blog Competition. Check out her winning blog post on “Equity” below!<\/em><\/p>\n Would you believe it if I told you that by having me, a female, as your physician, that you\u2019re statistically more likely to stay out of the hospital and less likely to die in the next 30 days? You may if you recently read an article published in JAMA(1). Now, would you believe that, as a resident, I\u2019m consistently evaluated as inferior and slower to achieve markers of competency compared to my male colleagues, solely, because I\u2019m female?<\/p>\n Gender aside, residency is a driving force in medical education that molds, inspires and drives physicians to become who they are. The centerpiece of this process involves our apprenticeship with attendings. Their teaching, evaluations and feedback are indispensable to our growth through reinforcing our strengths and recognizing our weaknesses. So, if the question I posed to you was true, that men are \u201crated\u201d higher than female colleagues in a generalized performance of residency (spoiler alert: they are), do you think it would lead to a discrepancy in the molding of female physicians(2)?<\/p>\n I do.<\/p>\n Emergency Medicine adopted the \u201cMilestones\u201d for assessing resident progress throughout training(3). While these should be clear and blind to gender, the reality doesn\u2019t align. A study by Dayal et al. looking at 3 year EM programs found that by graduation, female residents were consistently evaluated lower on all 23 sub-competencies of EM. Based on these evaluations, the authors believed it would take female residents 3-4 more months of training to be considered equal(2).<\/p>\n Hmm, there must be a confounder. Perhaps something before residency explains this discrepancy? Nope. This same study suggested residents were evaluated at a similar level at the beginning of training but assessments quickly widened between sexes(2). Not only did attendings score performance of males higher, but feedback was found to be more concrete. Males were consistently directed on specific agendas, while females were left with discordant feedback; i.e. \u201cShe acts as a leader\u201d vs. \u201cShe comes across argumentative\u201d(4). Icing the cake, research says focused feedback directly improves future accomplishments(5). Quick recap: I\u2019m considered subpar and I\u2019m not getting dependable feedback. Great.<\/p>\n Somewhere in the back of my mind, the phrase \u201cimplicit bias\u201d is screaming. You know, that unconscious bias for gender (race, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc.), or more accurately, the prejudice against one. What is it about me that causes perception of feeble performance? I keep patients alive and out of the hospital! Alas, my sex precludes me from being fairly evaluated on traits that have long been considered masculine, in a field that has long been dominated by men(4).<\/p>\n Let\u2019s hypothesize.<\/p>\n There is abundant evidence of gender gaps in the world of medicine. Women are 50% of medical school graduates yet only compromise 1\u20443 of the workforce. They reduce patient mortality in a statistically significant way but have lower incomes1. Male academic positions far surpass female(4). Female grand round speakers fall below 35%5. Speaking of\u00a0<\/em>35%, it\u2019s the percentage of female EM residents currently. We rank 21st out of 34\u00a0<\/em>specialties with the highest percentages of females(<\/em>6). Hypothesis: This gap exists due to more than just the tried-and-untrue \u201cwomen have babies\u201d argument(1). Women are repeatedly subjected to implicit biases throughout training and by later years, are left severely disadvantaged.<\/p>\n What happens when this cycle exists?<\/p>\n Women are deprived from believing they can be leaders in medicine and academia.<\/p>\n Women are systematically rated below male counterparts.<\/p>\n The next generation of young female physicians lack relatable mentors.<\/p>\n What happens is disparity<\/em> for women in medicine.<\/p>\n How does this cycle break?<\/p>\n Residencies have to take gender bias seriously. Implementing trainings specifically tailored towards confronting it would allow for more inclusivity in departments as a whole1. In addition, mentorship itself plays a strong role in many aspects of career building8. The gender and mentor gaps in medicine should be targeted by actively pairing women together. Or just maybe, we start with awareness. The simple idea of having a conversation and accepting the idea that residency training isn\u2019t perfect, but that with time, recognition and action, change is inevitable.<\/p>\n Equity; the quality of being fair and impartial.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also something that I still have hope for as a female physician.<\/p>\n Please, let\u2019s start talking.<\/p>\n For further reading: Patients Cared For By Female Doctors Fare Better Than Those Treated By Men<\/a><\/p>\n Why Female Physicians Achieve Better Outcomes Than Males<\/a><\/p>\n Should You Choose a Female Doctor?<\/a><\/p>\n Resources: 2. Dayal A, O’Connor DM, Qadri U, Arora VM. Comparison of Male vs Female Resident Milestone Evaluations by Faculty During Emergency Medicine Residency Training. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(5):651-657.<\/p>\n
\nResearch: Vague Feedback Is Holding Women Back<\/a><\/p>\n
\n1. Tsugawa Y, Jena AB, Figueroa JF, Orav EJ, Blumenthal DM, Jha AK. Comparison of Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates for Medicare Patients Treated by Male vs Female Physicians. JAMA Intern Med.2017;177(2):206\u2013213. doi:10.1001\/jamainternmed.2016.7875<\/p>\n