Gender and Language in Letters of Recommendation for Obstetrics and Gynecology Fellowship Applications.

To delineate the use of gender-biased language in letters of recommendation for Obstetrics and Gynecology fellowships and its impact on applicants. Fellowship letters of recommendation from 4 Obstetrics and Gynecology specialties at a single institution in 2020 were included. frequency of agentic and communal language in letters of recommendation using Linguistics Inquiry Word Count software. letter of recommendation length and language utilization by author gender and applicant success measured by interviews and match success. Marginal models were fit to determine if language varied by applicant and writer gender and subspecialty. Modified Poisson regression models were used to determine associations between language and interview receipt. Single academic institution (Duke University); 2020 OB/GYN fellowship application cycle. A total of 1216 letters of recommendation submitted by 326 unique applicants for OB/GYN subspecialty fellowships at our institution. Rates of gender-biased language were low (Agentic:1.3%; communal: 0.8%). Agentic term use did not vary by applicant or author gender (p = 0.78 and 0.16) Male authors utilized 19% fewer communal terms than females (p < 0.001). Each 0.25% increase in agentic language was associated with an 18% reduction in the probability of interview invitation at our institution (p = 0.004). Percentage of agentic or communal language was not associated with successful matching into any subspecialty. No differences in agentic vs communal language based on applicant gender were found in this cohort, though female letter writers wrote longer letters with more communal terms. Increasing agentic terms negatively impacted interview invitation but did not affect successful matching.

Ellett T ，Zanolli N ，Weber JM ，Erkanli A ，Rosette AS ，Dotters-Katz SK ，Davidson B ... -  《-》

Identifying Gender and Racial Bias in Pediatric Fellowship Letters of Recommendation: Do Word Choices Influence Interview Decisions?

To describe linguistic differences in letters of recommendation (LORs) for pediatric fellowship candidates based on applicant and letter writer demographics and to examine if these differences influenced the decision to interview a candidate for a fellowship position. LORs for applicants to 8 pediatric subspecialty fellowships at a single academic center from the 2020 Match were analyzed in this cross-sectional study. Frequency of validated agentic and communal terms in each letter were determined by a language processing web application. Bias was determined as having a >5% surplus of agentic or communal terms. We analyzed 1521 LORs from 409 applicants: 69% were women, 28% were under-represented minorities in medicine (URM), and 50% were invited to interview. Overall, 66% of LORs were agentic biased, 16% communal biased, and 19% neutral. There was no difference in bias in LORs by an applicant's gender (woman 67% agentic vs man 62% agentic; P = .058), race, or ethnicity (non-URM 65% agentic vs URM 67% agentic; P = .660). Despite a lower frequency of agentic terms in LORs for applicants invited for interviews, when accounting for other components of an application and applicant demographics, no significant association was made between language bias in LORs and fellowship interview status. The frequency of agentic and communal terms in LORs for pediatric subspecialty fellowship candidates were not found to influence the decision to invite a candidate to interview. However, raising awareness of potential areas of bias within the pediatric fellowship selection process might lead to a more equitable and holistic approach to application review.

Boolchandani H ，Chen L ，Elder RW ，Osborn R ，Phatak UP ，Puthenpura V ，Sheares BJ ，Tiyyagura G ，Amster L ，Lee S ，Langhan ML ... -  《-》

Gender and Racial Bias in Radiology Residency Letters of Recommendation.

Perceptions of agency and communality vary by race and gender, which may be contributing to the persistent gender and racial inequality in radiology. The objective of this study was to determine if there are differences in the use of agentic and communal language in letters of recommendation for radiology residency programs based on the demographics of the applicant and letter writer. We retrospectively reviewed letters of recommendation for 736 diagnostic radiology residency applicants to Duke University from the 2015 to 2016 interview season. We then used computerized text analysis software to calculate the frequency of agentic and communal terms and multilevel negative binominal regression to compare differences in count by applicant and letter writer demographics. We analyzed 2,624 letters of recommendation, comprising 976,489 words. The majority of applicants were male (75%, 549 of 736) and white or Asian (77%, 565 of 736). Letter writers, who were mostly male (75%, 1,979 of 2,624) and of senior rank (50%, 1,313 of 2,624), described female applicants as more agentic than men (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.08, P < .05) and described blacks and Latinx applicants as less agentic than whites and Asians (IRR = 0.932, P < .05). Secondary analysis showed that female letters writers described applicants as more agentic (IRR = 1.09, P < .05) and more communal (IRR = 1.12, P < .01) than did male writers, and senior rank faculty used agentic (IRR = 0.95, P < .05) and communal (IRR = 0.88, P < .01) language less often than did junior faculty. The extent to which agentic and communal language is used in letters of recommendation for diagnostic radiology residency programs differs by applicant and letter writer demographics.

Grimm LJ ，Redmond RA ，Campbell JC ，Rosette AS ... -  《-》

Linguistic Differences by Gender in Letters of Recommendation for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship Applicants.

As in many realms of academia and medicine, in obstetrics and gynecology, women experience gender bias in residency evaluations and academic promotions. More specifically, women in Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) are underrepresented within departmental leadership positions. As a means of identifying spaces where bias may exist, multiple investigators have previously reported on gender bias in letters of recommendation (LORs) for residency and subspecialty training programs. We aimed to determine if linguistic differences exist in LORs for self-identified male and female applicants to MFM fellowship at an academic institution. This was a retrospective single-site cohort study from 2019 to 2021. Data collected included applicant's age, self-reported race/ethnicity and gender, geographic region of residency, step 1 and 2 scores, scholarly and volunteer activities, and number of LORs. The Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software, a validated text analysis program, was used to characterize LOR linguistic content. Multivariable analysis was used to compare letter characteristics to applicant demographics. A total of 212 applications were reviewed, including 808 LORs. Women comprised 76.9% of applicants, and men 23.1%. Most applicants identified as non-Hispanic White (52.8%). Men were more likely to be international medical graduates (20 vs. 6%, p ≤ 0.01), and women reported more volunteer activities (7.1 ± 5.1 vs. 5.5 ± 4.3, p = 0.04). There were no differences in step scores, number of research projects, or number of LORs. Multivariable analysis controlling for applicant race, step 1 score, and gender of letter writer revealed that letters written for males contained significantly more references to the word category cognitive processes (7.4 ± 0.2 vs. 7.1 ± 0.1, p = 0.046), specifically in reference to the subcategories of certainty and differentiation. We identified linguistic differences in LORs written for MFM applicants, suggesting potential bias in the style of writing for male and female physicians applying to this field. · Gender bias exists in the evaluation and promotion of women in medicine.. · We sought to determine whether it also exists in letters of recommendation for MFM fellowship.. · Previous studies have examined gender bias in letters of recommendation for other specialties.. · Linguistic bias was detected in letters of recommendation for MFM fellowship from 2019 through 2021.. · We found evidence of linguistic differences based on gender of applicant and letter writers..

Rosenthal E ，Tappy E ，Pan E ，Verma D ，Wang A ，Brown LS ，Santiago-Muñoz P ，Florian-Rodriguez M ... -  《-》

Linguistic Analysis of Letters of Recommendation for Vascular Surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology Applicants Detects Differences in Attributable Strengths Based on Gender.

We asked whether letters of recommendation (LOR) written for applicants to vascular surgery (VS), a field where men have traditionally predominated, differentially highlight attributes based on applicant gender. For comparison, LOR for applicants to Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn), a surgical field where women are highly represented were evaluated. We performed a cross-sectional review of LORs for students applying to VS or Ob/Gyn at our institution from 2017 to2018. Blinded to the gender of both the applicant and the letter author, investigators assessed word count per letter and used published rubrics to quantify how many words in the following categories: communal ("friendly"), able ("competent"), standout ("exceptional"), and grindstone ("hardworking"). Frequencies were reported as a function of specialty and gender. The study was performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and included letters written for applicants only to the stated residency programs at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. LOR written for self-identified women and men applying to both residencies from US-based allopathic medical schools were de-identified and evaluated by blinded reviewers. One hundred and ninety-eight letters were reviewed for vascular surgery applicants. Two hundred letters were randomly selected from applications to Ob/Gyn as a comparison. Fifty-four vascular (27.8% women) and 63 Ob/Gyn (77.8% women) applicants were reviewed (p < 0.001 for gender). Licensing exam scores were higher for women than men applying to Ob/Gyn. Honor status was similar across fields and gender. Letters were shorter for VS applicants (p = 0.04). Gender-specific words (i.e., "lady" or "gentleman") were used more in VS letters (0.24 ± 0.50 vs 0.14 ± 0.42, p = 0.048). Ability words were more common (4.7 ± 2.6 vs 3.8 ± 2.1, p = 0.028) and grindstone adjectives were less common (3.4 ± 2.3 vs 4.5 ± 3.1, p = 0.024) in letters written for women compared to men VS applicants. Twenty-nine letters written for students applying to VS had honors status. While none written for women mentioned this achievement, 43% of those written for men did (p < 0.05). Letters for women applicants to Ob/Gyn contained more standout adjectives than those written for men (2.12 ± 2.2 vs 1.39 ± 1.25, p = 0.021). Reference letters for both specialties highlighted attributes differently depending on the gender of the applicant. Although this likely represents an unconscious process, care should be taken to limit potential biases in LOR which are "gatekeepers" to access and advancement.

Go C ，Lang S ，Byrne M ，Brucha DL ，Parviainen K ，Sachdev U ... -  《-》