Professional Address during Obstetrics and Gynecology Grand Rounds Introductions: Setting the Stage, Setting the Standard

Renee T. Sullender, Melissa F. Meyer, Emily M. Buttigieg, Zachary R. Dunton, Amy Godecker, Narjust Duma, Sarah M. Temkin, Christine A. Heisler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess gender dynamics during Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn) Grand Rounds. Design: This was an observational cohort study of Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introductions at a large academic center. Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introductions from December 2016 to February 2020 were included. Audio and video components of introductions for those with doctorate degrees were reviewed. Each named reference to the presenter and use of descriptors were collected. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables. Setting: This study was completed at the University of Wisconsin in the Department of Ob/Gyn Participants: Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introducers who had complete audio and video components of introductions for those with doctorate degrees. Results: Sixty-four Grand Rounds introductions were reviewed; 57 met inclusion criteria. The majority of introducers and presenters were women. Consistent use of “doctor” was similar by men and women introducers (50% vs. 29%, p = 0.427). Assistant professors were more likely to maintain professional address during introductions, compared to associate or full professors (86% vs. 0% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Trainees were less likely than faculty to be addressed professionally at any time during introductions (42% vs. 81%, p = 0.017). Descriptors were used for men and women presenters, though men received more female-gendered descriptors than women (5 vs. 1, p = 0.011). Women introducers used productivity descriptors less often than men introducers (8 [15.1%] vs. 5 [55.6%] (p = 0.015)). Conclusions: Use of professional address was associated with academic rank, but not gender. Men endorsed and received more descriptors emphasizing accomplishments, highlighting qualifications as an expert. Given the professional environment, all Grand Rounds presenters should be introduced using professional titles.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1930-1937
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Surgical Education
Volume78
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2021
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Grand Rounds
  • Interpersonal and Communication Skills
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Professionalism
  • Systems-Based Practice
  • academic medicine
  • gender bias
  • unconscious bias
  • women physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Education

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Professional Address during Obstetrics and Gynecology Grand Rounds Introductions: Setting the Stage, Setting the Standard'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this