journal article
LitStream Collection
Home
Coverdale, John; Beresin, Eugene V.; Balon, Richard; Guerrero, Anthony P. S.; Morreale, Mary K.; Louie, Alan K.; Aggarwal, Rashi; Seritan, Andreea L.; Thomas, Lia A.; Castillo, Enrico G.; Brenner, Adam M.
2025 Academic Psychiatry
doi: 10.1007/s40596-024-02097-0pmid: 39753838
Ludgate, Melissa B.; Morse, Emily E.; Brown, Hailey M.; Min, James Y.; Chan, Aubrey C.
2025 Academic Psychiatry
doi: 10.1007/s40596-024-02110-6pmid: 39776355
ObjectiveThe authors aimed to determine if medical students’ self-assessment of abilities and performance differed by gender during the psychiatry clerkship and if these differences were reflected objectively in test scores or clinical evaluations from educators.MethodsData from mid-clerkship self-assessments completed during the psychiatry core clerkship were reviewed from two classes of medical students. Students rated their performance on 14 items across five domains: knowledge/clinical reasoning, differential diagnosis, data presentation, studying skills, and teamwork as “below,” “at,” or “above expected level.” Ratings were coded numerically, and statistical analysis was performed using Student’s T-test. National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Subject Exam scores and clinical evaluations served as measures of actual performance.ResultsFemale students (n = 123) rated their performance significantly below male peers (n = 114) in medical knowledge (female − 0.05 vs male 0.13), clinical reasoning (− 0.02 vs 0.06), differential diagnosis (− 0.09 vs 0.00), balancing work and studying (− 0.02 vs 0.11), keeping up with clerkship assignments (0.03 vs 0.13), understanding role on the team (0.11 vs 0.23), interacting with other team members (0.15 vs 0.31), and functioning as part of the team (0.13 vs 0.25). Clinical evaluation scores and NBME Subject Exam scores showed no significant difference (evaluation scores 138.1 vs 136.0; NBME scores 163.8 vs 162.2) in performance between students.ConclusionsFemale medical students tend to underrate their performance compared to male peers in clinical knowledge, studying skills, and teamwork, despite equivalent academic and clinical performance. This study highlights gender disparities in self-assessment during medical training.
Esplen, Mary Jane; Vigod, Simone N.; Darani, Shaheen A.; Ho, Certina; Kozloff, Nicole; Szatmari, Peter; Lanctôt, Krista; Silver, Ivan; Lin, Elizabeth; Soklaridis, Sophie; Teshima, John; Wong, Jiahui; Fiksenbaum, Lisa; Kwong, Danica
2025 Academic Psychiatry
doi: 10.1007/s40596-024-02100-8pmid: 39806113
ObjectivesMentorship supports faculty to succeed in their careers with confidence, resilience, and satisfaction. To address inequities evident with an informal approach, a formal mentorship program was designed and implemented.MethodsThe Quality Implementation Framework (QIF) was applied. Engagement with key stakeholders and users was emphasized. The goals of the program are to address inequities and create greater satisfaction with academic careers among diverse faculty working in various roles/sites. A central component is a primary 1:1 mentor/mentee model, supported with an online matching tool. 1:1 mentorship is augmented with several group mentorships, to support specific academic roles (e.g., clinician scientists; clinician teachers) or social identity. Mentorship training workshops and resources support mentors/mentees; topics include best practices, DEI, and mentorship and mentorship tools. Descriptive statistics (means, SDs, percentages) summarized findings on mentees/mentors at enrollment.ResultsSixty-six mentors registered. Recently hired faculty (n = 136) were invited to participate, resulting in 105 mentees (77%). There is a significant improvement in mentor perception of the department’s culture of mentorship (t(198) = 4.188, p < 0.001). Key mentee goals were to gain career guidance and support, information on academic promotion, skills in professional relationships, and networking. Identified challenges among mentors/mentees include having differing goals, time commitment, and managing difficult conversations. Mentorship groups were well-received with high satisfaction.ConclusionsUptake and participation is encouraging. QIF will help identify contextual factors related to uptake and use of the program and additional implementation strategies needed. The project will contribute to literature on implementation and sustainability of mentorship programs.
Showing 1 to 5 of 5 Articles