In Reply We appreciate the responses to our Viewpoint, “Should We Train Female and Male Residents Slightly Differently?”1 and thank the authors for continuing the conversation. It is clear that we all share a deep commitment to gender equality and creating an environment of equal opportunity for all surgical trainees.
We wrote our Viewpoint1 to propose potential mechanisms behind a gender disparity gap in surgical training: namely, female trainees have less operative autonomy than male trainees (see Babchenko and Gast and references therein1 and Meyerson et al2). This inequality may be owing to implicit gender bias (IGB); gender differences in confidence, self-assessment, and risk-taking (GDCAR); and gender differences in the assertiveness-likability relationship (ALR; assertive behaviors hinder women’s likability and are thus unconsciously avoided).1 Implicit gender bias, GDCAR, and ALR are not our opinions or stereotypes, but rather demonstrated research findings echoed in myriad fields, including surgery.1
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.
Babchenko O, Gast K. Training of Male and Female Surgical Residents—Reply. JAMA Surg. 2020;155(10):1001–1002. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2020.2451
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: