Background Residency application patterns by gender and race/ethnicity offer important insights about diversity in residency recruitment. It is unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic and virtual interviewing affected these patterns. Objective We hypothesized that the introduction of virtual interviews caused an increase in applications submitted per applicant and that there may be differences by gender and race/ethnicity. Methods We extracted publicly reported Electronic Residency Application Service application data from 2018 to 2022 for 14 residency specialties with 1000 or more applicants in 2022 by self-reported gender and underrepresented in medicine (UIM) status. We compared patterns before and after virtual interviews were introduced in 2021. Results Among 401 480 residency applicants, the average number of applications submitted per applicant increased for all specialties between 2018 and 2022 across gender and race/ethnicity. Across all years, women applied to more programs than men in 5 specialties (dermatology, neurology, obstetrics/gynecology, pediatrics, and surgery), whereas men applied to more programs than women in 3 (anesthesia, family medicine, and physical medicine and rehabilitation). Across all years, non-UIM applicants applied to more programs than UIM applicants in all 14 specialties. There were no clear changes in application patterns by gender and race/ethnicity during in-person versus virtual interview years. Conclusions The average number of applications submitted per applicant increased over time across gender and race/ethnicity. In some specialties, women applied to more programs than men, and in others vice-versa, whereas non-UIM applicants applied to more programs than UIM applicants in all specialties. Virtual interviews did not change these patterns.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence suggests gender disparities in medical education assessment, including differences in ratings of competency and narrative comments provided in resident performance assessments. This study explores how gender manifests within the content of qualitative assessments (i.e., narrative comments or performance feedback) of resident performance. METHODS: Qualitative content analysis was used to explore gender-based differences in narrative comments included in faculty assessments of resident performance during inpatient medicine rotations at six Internal Medicine residency programs, 2016-2017. A blinded, multi-analyst approach was employed to identify themes across comments. Patterns in themes with resident gender and post-graduate year (PGY) were explored, focusing on PGY2 and PGY3 when residents are serving in the team leader role. RESULTS: Data included 3,383 evaluations with narrative comments of 385 men (55.2%) and 313 women residents (44.8%). There were thematic differences in narrative comments received by men and women residents and how these themes manifested within comments changed with training time. Compared to men, comments about women had a persistent relationship-orientation and emphasized confidence over training including as interns and in PGY2 and PGY3, when serving as team leader. The relationship-orientation was characterized not only by the residents communal attributes but also their interpersonal and communication skills, including efforts supporting others and establishing the tone for the team. Comments about women residents often highlighted confidence, including recommendations around behaviors that convey confidence in decision-making and team leadership. DISCUSSION: There were gender-based thematic differences in qualitative assessments. Comments about women resident team leaders highlight relationship building skills and urge confidence and actions that convey confidence as team leader. Persistent attention to communal skills suggests gendered expectations for women resident team leaders and a lost opportunity for well-rounded feedback to the disadvantage of women residents. These findings may inform interventions to promote equitable assessment, such as providing feedback across the competencies.

BACKGROUND: Equitable assessment is critical in competency-based medical education. This study explores differences in key characteristics of qualitative assessments (i.e., narrative comments or assessment feedback) of internal medicine postgraduate resident performance associated with gender and race and ethnicity. METHODS: Analysis of narrative comments included in faculty assessments of resident performance from six internal medicine residency programs was conducted. Content analysis was used to assess two key characteristics of comments- valence (overall positive or negative orientation) and specificity (detailed nature and actionability of comment) - via a blinded, multi-analyst approach. Differences in comment valence and specificity with gender and race and ethnicity were assessed using multilevel regression, controlling for multiple covariates including quantitative competency ratings. RESULTS: Data included 3,383 evaluations with narrative comments by 597 faculty of 698 residents, including 45% of comments about women residents and 13.2% about residents who identified with race and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine. Most comments were moderately specific and positive. Comments about women residents were more positive (estimate 0.06, p 0.045) but less specific (estimate - 0.07, p 0.002) compared to men. Women residents were more likely to receive non-specific, weakly specific or no comments (adjusted OR 1.29, p 0.012) and less likely to receive highly specific comments (adjusted OR 0.71, p 0.003) or comments with specific examples of things done well or areas for growth (adjusted OR 0.74, p 0.003) than men. Gendered differences in comment specificity and valence were most notable early in training. Comment specificity and valence did not differ with resident race and ethnicity (specificity: estimate 0.03, p 0.32; valence: estimate - 0.05, p 0.26) or faculty gender (specificity: estimate 0.06, p 0.15; valence: estimate 0.02 p 0.54). CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the specificity and valence of qualitative assessments associated with resident gender with women receiving more praising but less specific and actionable comments. This suggests a lost opportunity for well-rounded assessment feedback to the disadvantage of women.