IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0319549.html

Gender discrimination and personal and professional development fostered by allopathic medical schools in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Shruthi Venkataraman
  • Mytien Nguyen
  • Sarwat I Chaudhry
  • Mayur M Desai
  • Tonya L Fancher
  • Alexandra M Hajduk
  • Hyacinth R C Mason
  • Alexis Webber
  • Dowin Boatright

Abstract

Background: Despite prevalent gender discrimination in medical education, its influence on personal and professional development, foundational competencies in medical training per the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), remains unclear. This retrospective cross-sectional study assesses how experiences of gender discrimination in medical school influence personal and professional identity formation (PPIF) among males and females. Methods: Deidentified student-level data were procured from the AAMC data warehouse for 37,610 MD students who matriculated in 2014–2015 and took the Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) between 2016–2020. Gender discrimination frequency was categorized as ‘Never’, ‘Isolated’, and ‘Recurrent’ from GQ responses to questions about denial of opportunities, offensive remarks, and lower evaluations due to gender. Students self-reported their sex as male, female or declined to answer. PPIF was assessed using two separate GQ metrics assessing student agreement on a 5-point Likert scale that their medical school fostered and nurtured their development as a person and a future physician, respectively, and dichotomized. Results: Female students experienced higher rates of isolated (12.6%) and recurrent (20.1%) gender discrimination than males (4.3% isolated, 6.2% recurrent). Females reported slightly lower personal (71.2%) but similar professional development (92.2%) rates compared to males (73.4% personal, 91.2% professional). Both sexes experiencing gender discrimination had lower likelihoods of PPIF than their counterparts without these experiences. If recurrent discrimination occurred, the aRR (95%CI) of professional development was 0.89 (0.87–0.90) for females and 0.78 (0.74–0.81) for males, while for personal development, it was 0.69 (0.67–0.71) for females and 0.61 (0.58–0.66) for males. Compared to females, males showed sharper declines in professional development as discrimination frequency increased from never to isolated (aRR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.92–0.94], p

Suggested Citation

  • Shruthi Venkataraman & Mytien Nguyen & Sarwat I Chaudhry & Mayur M Desai & Tonya L Fancher & Alexandra M Hajduk & Hyacinth R C Mason & Alexis Webber & Dowin Boatright, 2026. "Gender discrimination and personal and professional development fostered by allopathic medical schools in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-17, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0319549
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319549
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319549&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0319549?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0319549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.