GrouchoMarx Posted January 19, 2017 Report Share Posted January 19, 2017 http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Abstract/publishahead/Clinical_Performance_Evaluations_of_Third_Year.98294.aspx My boy uwopremed's gonna love this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralk Posted January 19, 2017 Report Share Posted January 19, 2017 http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Abstract/publishahead/Clinical_Performance_Evaluations_of_Third_Year.98294.aspx My boy uwopremed's gonna love this one. I suspect he will - one of the results is that female evaluators give higher marks on clinical performance to female students relative to male students while male evaluators show no difference. On its own, this study is open to numerous valid interpretations. One is that female students are outperforming their male counterparts but go unacknowledged by male preceptors. Another is that there is no difference in performance but that female preceptors are perceiving female students to be superior. That latter interpretation kind of goes along with his males-are-persecuted shtick. This is an interesting study, but the main take-away here is that clinical evaluations are subjective and certainly prone to bias of some sort. It does not provide much information on where that bias lies, or what implications it has on evaluations, which the study authors themselves fully admit to in their discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a1b1 Posted January 20, 2017 Report Share Posted January 20, 2017 this does not surprise me one bit clinical evaluations during clerkship is all bs anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.