Article

Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review.

Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 30.39). 09/2002; 288(6):756-64. DOI: 10.1001/jama.288.6.756
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Physician gender has been viewed as a possible source of variation in the interpersonal aspects of medical practice, with speculation that female physicians facilitate more open and equal exchange and a different therapeutic milieu from that of male physicians. However, studies in this area are generally based on small samples, with conflicting results.
To systematically review and quantify the effect of physician gender on communication during medical visits.
Online database searches of English-language abstracts for the years 1967 to 2001 (MEDLINE, AIDSLINE, PsycINFO, and Bioethics); a hand search was conducted of reprint files and the reference sections of review articles and other publications.
Studies using a communication data source, such as audiotape, videotape, or direct observation, and large national or regional studies in which physician report was used to establish length of visit, were identified through bibliographic and computerized searches. Twenty-three observational studies and 3 large physician-report studies reported in 29 publications met inclusion criteria and were rated.
The Cohen d was computed based on 2 reviewers' (J.A.H. and Y.A.) independent extraction of quantitative information from the publications. Study heterogeneity was tested using Q statistics and pooled effect sizes were computed using the appropriate effects model. The characteristics of the study populations were also extracted.
Female physicians engage in significantly more active partnership behaviors, positive talk, psychosocial counseling, psychosocial question asking, and emotionally focused talk. There were no gender differences evident in the amount, quality, or manner of biomedical information giving or social conversation. Medical visits with female physicians are, on average, 2 minutes (10%) longer than those with male physicians. Obstetrics and gynecology may present a different pattern than that of primary care, with male physicians demonstrating higher levels of emotionally focused talk than their female colleagues.
Female primary care physicians engage in more communication that can be considered patient centered and have longer visits than their male colleagues. Limited studies exist outside of primary care, and gender-related practice patterns in some subspecialties may differ from those evident in primary care.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
89 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To analyze and compare malpractice claims rates between male and female ophthalmologists and test the hypothesis that claims rates are equal between the two sexes. A retrospective, cohort study review was made of all claims reported to the Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company from January 1990 through December 2008 in which an expense (including indemnity and/or legal defense costs) was paid or reserved. A total of 2,251 claims were examined. Frequency (claims per physician) and severity (indemnity payment, associated expenses and reserves per claim) were analyzed for both male and female ophthalmologists. Frequency and severity data were further stratified by allegation, type of treatment, and injury severity category. Men were sued 54% more often than females over the period studied (P<.001). Women had lower claims frequencies across all allegations and within the treatment areas of cataract, cornea, and retinal procedures (P<.7). Men had more claims associated with severe injury, including permanent major injury and death (P<.001). The average amount paid in indemnity and expenses was 7% higher for claims against women ($115,303 compared to $107,354 against men). Nearly 20 years of closed claim data reveal male ophthalmologists are significantly more likely than women to have reported malpractice activity. Claims against men were associated with more severe injury to the patient but were slightly less costly overall compared to claims against women. Further study is necessary to understand the reasons underlying gender disparities in malpractice claims rates and whether the observed past differences are predictive of future results.
    Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society 07/2014; 112:38-49.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Female physicians have a more patient-centered communication style than their male counterparts; however, few studies have investigated how the biomedical or psychosocial nature of a patient diagnosis might moderate this relationship. Seventy six 3rd year residents (50 male and 26 females) seeking board certification from the Korean Academy of Family Medicine participated in the 2013 Clinical Practice Examination by conducting two simulated patient (SP) interviews, one presenting a largely psychosocial case and the other largely biomedical. The interview recordings were coded with the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Female physicians and their SPs engaged in more dialog than male physicians in both cases. Female physicians were more patient-centered than males for the psychosocial case (t=-3.24, P<0.05), however, their scores did not differ for the biomedical case. In multivariate analysis, a significant interaction between physician gender and case (z=-3.90, P<0.001) similarly demonstrated greater female patient-centeredness only for the predominantly psychosocial case. Case characteristics moderated the association between physician gender and patient-centeredness. Case characteristics need to be considered in future research on the association of physician gender and the patient-centered communication, as well as in the tailoring of physician communication training. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Patient Education and Counseling 10/2014; 98(1):55-60. · 2.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract presentations at scientific congresses are a preparation for publication in peer reviewed journals. The present study aimed to investigate the prediction of abstract acceptance of peer reviewed publications focusing on the difference between male and female first authors. We evaluated 8411 abstracts submitted to the German Cardiac Society by 2090 females and 6321 male scientists. Abstract grading (3 to 9 reviewers, blinded on a 5-point scale) separated those accepted and rejected followed by a bibliometric analysis of Medline publications from 2006 to 2012. While rating of abstracts was not different between males and females (p=0.475), publication rate of females was lower compared to males (17.5% vs 24.4≥%, p<0.001). Female authors achieved a higher impact factor in their publications (5.1±0.2 vs 4.4±0.1, p=0.0003) and were more often listed on papers in highly ranked journals (impact factor ≥5) than males. Although, more accepted abstracts than rejected ones were published in high rank journals, a considerable number of papers were generated from rejected abstracts (22%). Female cardiologists had a better publication success than males concerning high rank peer reviewed publications. Acceptance in blinded abstract evaluation often detects work published later, while rejected contributions still might represent high quality work suitable for publication in peer reviewed journals. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    International Journal of Cardiology 12/2014; 181C:267-269. · 6.18 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
2 Downloads
Available from