If you still think that being a woman somehow prevents someone from being a good doctor, you are what's called an idiot. If you do not know what idiot means in this case, you are an idiot. Forget the notion that our medical system and society have become post-gender or post-racial in any way. Not even close. Our medical system and society haven't even become post-stupid and still need studies like the one published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine to compare men and women as doctors. Yes, in the year 2017, many people still need a study and perhaps even further studies to show them that women, who are humans, can be as effective as other humans as doctors. In fact, in the JAMA Internal Medicine study, women came out slightly ahead. A team of researchers (Yusuke Tsugawa, M.D., M.P.H., Ph.D.; Anupam B. Jena, M.D., Ph.D.; Jose F. Figueroa, M.D., M.P.H.; E. John Orav, Ph.D.; Daniel M. Blumenthal, M.D., M.B.A.; Ashish K. Jha, M.D., M.P.H.) from Harvard analyzed over 1 .5 million hospitalizations of Medicare patients 65 years or older over a four-year period (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014). They found that patients treated by female physicians had a 0.43% lower chance of dying (11.07% vs. 11.49%) within the first 30 days after being admitted to the hospital than patients treated by male physicians. They also found that patients treated by female physicians were less likely (15.02% vs. 15.57%) to be re-admitted to the hospital within 30 days after being discharged from the hospital. The researchers indicated that these findings persisted even when adjusting for type of medical condition and severity of illness. In other words, you can't explain these results by saying that men just take care of sicker patients. Why did the study find female doctors to have somewhat lower mortality and readmission rates? Well, analyzing a single broad population sample only suggests some possible general trends and does not definitively confirm or explain the trends. Many other factors besides inherent gender differences could explain the results. For example, maybe hospitals that are more likely to recruit and retain female doctors have other characteristics that lead to better care, such as more resources, better-trained staff, more enlightened leadership and less hostile environments. Are women who make it through medical education on average more qualified and capable because they've been held to higher standards? Maybe. Could many female doctors be working harder because they feel like they need to prove themselves? Possibly. Could the challenges that women face during their careers make them in general more empathetic towards patients? Potentially. Is the male average being dragged down by older male doctors who are not up to date on the latest guidelines or procedures? Perhaps. Large population studies tend to lump individuals into broad categories, make gross generalizations and gloss over more complex differences among individuals. Regardless, the results certainly do not support any notion that women in general are worse doctors than men. Why is such a study even necessary? Well...the unfortunate reason is that enough people still hold onto or propagate the belief that gender somehow is related to performance as a doctor. (By the way, such people are not all men. There are women who hold such beliefs, too.) Women continue to face particular challenges during their medical careers, such as being questioned about whether they are really doctors and being asked, "Do you like vagina?" as reported by Allyson Herbst in the Washington Post. (Note: being asked if you like vagina is not a question on the medical boards.) In the hospital halls, you still hear some doctors and patients saying, "Women doctors do this," or, "Female doctors do that." Gross generalizations. Some grosser than others. And these are just the people making their opinions known, so who knows how many others feel the same way. In fact, persistent stereotypes have led Heather Logghe, M.D., to start #ILookLikeASurgeon: Why should female doctors be any less capable than male doctors? Yes, men may be naturally better at some jobs, such as being sperm donors. And women are better at being egg donors. (Men are terrible egg donors, unless you are talking about Easter eggs.) However, for the majority of other jobs such as being a doctor, being a man or a women doesn't necessarily make you more or less capable. What matters is the individual. The Harvard study does not tell you to always choose a female physician instead of a male physician. Remember both men and women include a very diverse range of people with different personalities, viewpoints, skills, abilities and backgrounds. Some men and women are spectacular doctors. Others probably should have been dog surfing instructors. (Not that there is anything wrong with being a dog surfing instructor, but you don't want a dog surfing instructor treating your infection.) The rest sit somewhere along the spectrum. Women can be just as meticulous or just as sloppy as men. Or just as cold or warm. Or just as hard-working or lazy. In fact, a given man and a given women can be more similar to each other than two given women. Or two given men. (Or for that matter, two taken men or two taken women.) Will we ever reach a time when people use other, more relevant characteristics to judge a doctor rather than gender, racial/ethnic background, appearance, beliefs, lifestyle or anything else unrelated to job performance? Being truly post-gender and post-racial means everyone looks beyond appearances and focuses on capabilities. Unfortunately, society and the medical system are still nowhere near this point. Why should female doctors be any less capable than male doctors? Yes, men may be naturally better at some jobs, such as being sperm donors. And women are better at being egg donors. (Men are terrible egg donors, unless you are talking about Easter eggs.) However, for the majority of other jobs such as being a doctor, being a man or a women doesn't necessarily make you more or less capable. What matters is the individual. The Harvard study does not tell you to always choose a female physician instead of a male physician. Remember both men and women include a very diverse range of people with different personalities, viewpoints, skills, abilities and backgrounds. Some men and women are spectacular doctors. Others probably should have been dog surfing instructors. (Not that there is anything wrong with being a dog surfing instructor, but you don't want a dog surfing instructor treating your infection.) The rest sit somewhere along the spectrum. Women can be just as meticulous or just as sloppy as men. Or just as cold or warm. Or just as hard-working or lazy. In fact, a given man and a given women can be more similar to each other than two given women. Or two given men. (Or for that matter, two taken men or two taken women.) Will we ever reach a time when people use other, more relevant characteristics to judge a doctor rather than gender, racial/ethnic background, appearance, beliefs, lifestyle or anything else unrelated to job performance? Being truly post-gender and post-racial means everyone looks beyond appearances and focuses on capabilities. Unfortunately, society and the medical system are still nowhere near this point. Source
