Differences in operative self-assessment between male and female plastic surgery residents: A survey of 8,149 cases

Carisa M. Cooney, Pathik Aravind, Scott D. Lifchez, C. Scott Hultman, Robert A. Weber, Sebastian Brooke, Damon S. Cooney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Previous studies show female residents tend to underrate and male residents to overrate their own performance. We sought to determine if plastic surgery resident trainee self-evaluations differ by resident sex. Methods: We extracted Operative Entrustability Assessment (OEA) data for plastic surgery programs from MileMarker™, a program capable of storing assessment data for CPT-coded procedures. Complete OEAs contain a trainee self-assessment and attending surgeon assessment. We used simple statistics and linear regression to assess differences, stratifying by trainee sex and post-graduate year (PGY). Results: We analyzed 8149 OEAs from 3 training programs representing 64 residents (25% female) and 51 attendings. Compared to attending assessments, both male and female residents significantly underrated their performance during PGY1. However, during PGY2-6 male residents’ self-evaluations were significantly higher and female residents’ self-evaluations significantly lower than their attending evaluations. Conclusions: Results demonstrated female plastic surgery residents underestimated and male residents overestimated their performance. Further studies are needed to determine reasons for these differences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)799-803
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Volume221
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2021

Keywords

  • Gender differences
  • Graduate medical education
  • Operative skill
  • Resident assessment
  • Self-assessment
  • Surgical education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Differences in operative self-assessment between male and female plastic surgery residents: A survey of 8,149 cases'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this