LAUSR

RATIONALE Recent studies of trainee evaluations of medical faculty have demonstrated subtle gender-based word choice differences. However, it is not known if this manifests in major contextual differences in written comments. OBJECTIVE We aimed to characterize qualitative differences in narrative evaluations of female and male Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine faculty. METHODS We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort analysis of trainee narrative evaluations of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM) faculty at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, written from 2015-2016. Directive and summative content analysis was performed by four raters. Major contextual themes were identified using constant comparative techniques. Thematic differences based on faculty gender were identified, with statistical significance determined using χ2 analysis (p < 0.05). Effect sizes were calculated using Cramer's V. RESULTS 1216 total narrative evaluations were analyzed, representing 62 faculty members [17 women, 45 men], with analysis continued for the full cohort beyond achieving saturation of themes. Five overarching themes emerged: teaching skills, clinical skills, supervision, interpersonal and communication skills, and leadership skills. Within subthemes, we found no significant gender differences in reference to general teaching skills, learning environment, enthusiasm for teaching, or interpersonal concern. We identified subtheme differences between male and female faculty evaluations in regards to mentions of learner autonomy, clinical learning environment, humor, and motivating the trainee for patient care. While the mention of constructive criticisms did not differ between genders, constructive criticisms of female faculty were more likely to mention demeanor (p 0.06). CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest minimal thematic differences in trainee narrative evaluations of male and female PCCM faculty. However, we noted several subtheme contextual differences between male and female faculty, which warrants further investigation.