MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383499456 · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2023.2229503

Pride & prejudice: A scoping review of LGBTQ + medical trainee experiences

2023· review· en· W4383499456 on OpenAlexaff
Alana Sorgini, Alexandra C. Istl, Mallory L. Downie, Amrit Kirpalani

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOTransgenderMental healthPsychological interventionThematic analysisMEDLINEMinority stressSexual orientationPrejudice (legal term)MedicineSexual minoritySuicidal ideationPsychologyPopulationClinical psychologyMedical educationFamily medicineQualitative researchNursingPsychiatryPoison controlSuicide preventionSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: LGBTQ + medical trainees experience significant discrimination. These individuals are stigmatized within a hetero- and cis-normative system, resulting in poorer outcomes in mental health and increased stress regarding career trajectory compared with their hetero- and cis-identifying counterparts. However, literature on the barriers experienced during medical training in this marginalized group is limited to small heterogeneous studies. This scoping review collates and explores prominent themes in existing literature on the personal and professional outcomes of LGBTQ + medical trainees. METHODS: We searched five library databases (SCOPUS, Ovid-Medline, ERIC, PsycINFO and EMBASE) for studies that investigated LGBTQ + medical trainees' academic, personal, or professional outcomes. Screening and full text review were performed in duplicate, and all authors participated in thematic analysis to determine emerging themes, which were iteratively reviewed to consensus. RESULTS: = 0.57). Major themes that emerged in the literature included the prevalence of discrimination and mistreatment faced by LGBTQ + medical trainees from colleagues and superiors, concerns regarding disclosure of sexual and/or gender minority identity, and overall negative impacts on mental health including higher rates of depression, substance use, and suicidal ideation. There was a noted lack of inclusivity in medical education and having an LGBTQ + identity had a large impact on career trajectory. Community with peers and mentors was an important determinant of success and belonging. There was a noteworthy lack of research on intersectionality or positive interventions that improved outcomes for this population. CONCLUSION: This scoping review highlighted important barriers facing LGBTQ + medical trainees, identifying substantial gaps in the existing literature. Research on supportive interventions and predictors of training success is lacking and will be important to foster an inclusive education system. These findings provide critical insights for education leaders and researchers to help create and evaluate inclusive and empowering environments for trainees.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1030.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.267
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207