Didactics

Implicit Bias in the Electronic Standardized Letter of Evaluations in Advanced Emergency Medicine Clerkship Rotations (CDEM & ADIEM Sponsored)

Friday, May 15, 2020

9:00 AM – 9:50 AM

Location: Tower Court A: Second Level

CE: 0.75

Participants should be aware of the following financial/non-financial relationships:

Emily Earl Royal: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Danielle T. Miller, MD: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Moises Gallegos, MD, MPH: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

William W. Dixon, MD: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Holly Caretta-Weyer, MD: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Stefanie Sebok-Syer, PhD: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Al'ai Alvarez, MD: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.

Gender disparities exist in academic medicine. Compared to men, and despite similar qualifications, women in academic medicine are less likely to hold positions of associate or full professors as well as leadership. In addition, qualitative and quantitative components of evaluations for women in medicine often contains bias. Additionally, despite similar training, PGY-3 women residents are frequently evaluated significantly lower than their male counterparts across all sub-competencies of ACGME educational milestones. Women residents also tend to receive more discordant feedback compared to men residents, with women residents receiving feedback that is more personality focused, compared to men applicants who receive more specific, actionable feedback. In this session, presenters will define implicit bias and identify how it can affect the evaluation process. They will share interventions to mitigate implicit bias in medicine using freely available tools and implicit bias tests. This will be followed by an analysis and critique of specific examples of implicit bias in evaluations and a discussion of strategies and best-practice skills for practicing standardized evaluations with minimal bias and reducing implicit bias in feedback.

Learning Objectives:

Define implicit bias and identify how implicit bias can affect the evaluation process
Analyze and critique specific examples of implicit bias in evaluations
Develop best-practice skills for practicing standardized evaluations with minimal bias

Presenter(s)

EE

Emily Earl Royal

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
DM

Danielle T. Miller, MD

Stanford University

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
MG

Moises Gallegos, MD, MPH

Stanford University Department of Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
WD

William W. Dixon, MD

Stanford University

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
Holly Caretta-Weyer, MD

Stanford University School of Medicine

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
Stefanie Sebok-Syer, PhD

Stanford University

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.
Al'ai Alvarez, MD

Stanford University Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: I do not have any relevant financial / non-financial relationships with any proprietary interests.