To the Editor I read with great interest the article entitled “Should We Train Female and Male Residents Slightly Differently?” in JAMA Surgery.1 This is not a new argument, but it is one that, unfortunately, perpetuates stereotypes and fails to consider the wider picture of representation in resident training and surgery more generally.
It is true that on many measures female milestone attainment is lower than that of men2 and the factors that the authors consider contribute to this. However, making an argument on the basis of only 1 factor, gender, inadvertently ignores the effect of myriad other pertinent factors, including ethnicity, socioeconomic status and upbringing, and religious and cultural beliefs. It also ignores a problem that arises even before training begins, a lack of diversity among physicians.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Ip MMT. Training of Male and Female Surgical Residents. JAMA Surg. 2020;155(10):998–999. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2020.2433
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: