RESUMO
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to assess gender-based mistreatment during medical education recalled by women who attended medical school between 1948 and 1975 and their perspectives on the #MeToo movement. Methods: Methods included a qualitative analysis of video-recorded structured interviews. Results: The 37 participants graduated in classes of 2-20% women. They described pervasive, multi-faceted gender-based mistreatment during training. Twenty (54%) disclosed personal experience of serious sexual mistreatment. Interviewees stressed that attitudes and behaviors toward women and trainees, now regarded as unacceptable, were previously widely accepted or tolerated. The majority (86%) expressed overall positive opinions of their training. Twenty-eight (76%) supported the #MeToo movement, four (11%) had negative opinions, and five (13.5%) were ambivalent or unwilling to comment. Seventeen (46%) were concerned that #MeToo damaged working relationships, twelve (32%) were concerned about overreach, and eight (22%) about false accusations. Conclusions: This group of older female physicians reported extensive experience of gender-based mistreatment and strong support of #MeToo. Nevertheless, about one quarter of the group did not support the #MeToo movement and even supporters expressed high rates of concern about the movement going too far, falsely accusing men of inappropriate behavior, and damaging working relationships. The interviewees did not want their medical training to be characterized as entirely negative, or to be portrayed as victims.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the impact of interviewing format changes on the family medicine (FM) residency interviewing process. Specifically, we compare applicant cost and time expenditures in traditional in-person, virtual-only, and hybrid interview years. We also report student perceptions of the virtual-only and hybrid interview processes. METHODS: Applicants for first-year FM residency positions via the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) completed a survey questionnaire in 2019-2020 (in-person interviewing only), 2020-2021 (virtual only), and 2021-2022 (hybrid). Statistical analyses included analysis of variance for questions related to applications, interviews, ranked programs, cost, and time spent. We used thematic analysis to code narrative comments about the interviewing experience for the virtual-only and hybrid years. RESULTS: Seventy-one FM applicants responded (response rate 63.4%). Costs for the in-person interview year were significantly higher ($2,394.70±$1,961.20) than the virtual ($646.80±$846.60, P=.0001) and hybrid years ($903.30±$793.40, P=.001). Days spent per applicant on in-person interviews was also significantly higher (25.9±7.9,) than virtual (14.9±7.6, P=.0001) and hybrid years (14.3±7.0, P<.0001). For virtual and hybrid years, thematic analyses identified five categories: "feelings related to interviewing," "suggestions for future," "convenience/logistics of interviewing," "perceived fit of program," and "cost/time of interviewing," that further elucidated applicant experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual interviewing works well for overall cost and time, but other aspects such as perceived fit with programs and equity need to be considered before residency programs adopt fully virtual or hybrid interviewing in future years.
