What if women are better?

[southernhybrid]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

https://blogs.sph.harvard.edu/ashish-jha/2016/12/19/do-women-make-better-doctors-than-men/

First, we examined differences in patient outcomes for female and male physicians across all medical conditions. Then, we adjusted for patient and physician characteristics. Next, we threw in a hospital “fixed-effect” – a statistical technique that ensures that we only compare male and female physicians within the same hospital. Finally, we did a series of additional analyses to check if our results held across more specific conditions.

We found that female physicians had lower 30-day mortality rates compared to male physicians. Holding patient, physician, and hospital characteristics constant narrowed that gap a little, but not much. After throwing everything into the model that we could, we were still left with a difference of about 0.43 percentage points (see table), a modest but clinically important difference (more on this below).

Next, we focused on the 8 most common conditions (to ensure that our findings weren’t driven by differences in a few conditions only) and found that across all 8 conditions, female physicians had better outcomes. Finally, we looked at subgroups by risk. We wondered – is the advantage of having a female physician still true if we just focus on the sickest patients? The answer is yes – in fact, the biggest gap in outcomes was among the very sickest patients. The sicker you are, the bigger the benefit of having a female physician (see figure).

Additionally, we did a variety of other “sensitivity” analyses, of which the most important focused on hospitalists. The biggest threat to any study that examines differences between physicians is selection – patients can choose their doctor (or doctors can choose their patients) in ways that make the groups of patients non-comparable. However, when patients are hospitalized for an acute illness, increasingly, they receive care from a “hospitalist” – a doctor who spends all of their clinical time in the hospital caring for whoever is admitted during their shift. This allows for “pseudo-randomization.” And the results? Again, female hospitalists had lower mortality than male hospitalists.

I am biased although my bias is based on my 42 years as a health care professional. Yes. For the most part, women are better doctors than men. The exception would probably be in orthopedic surgery on large joints and bones, because statistically speaking, men have more upper body strength than women.

Of course, I'm poking a little fun at the other thread that claims that men are better at math. They have a slight advantage statistically, but there are plenty of women who are exceptional at higher mathematics. Women just tend to like careers more that involve interacting with people. The reason that until the last few decades, most physicians were men is due to gender discrimination. Even now, female doctors tend to make less money than male doctors, despite, according to the Harvard study, statistically working longer hours than men.

And while I do prefer a female physician or NP, I have known a few male doctors that I felt were competent and caring. Just like some women are outstanding in math and technology, there are some men who are capable of being good physicians.

In conclusions, I encourage you all to choose a female health provider because statistically speaking, women are better health care providers than men.

Other than the way that women are treated in the workplace, including making less money, I'm not sure why we are putting so many threads in politics lately. Has everything become political?

 

[Worldtraveller]

I always prefer to go to women doctors. And it has nothing to do some kind of pervy thing...I save that for my wife.

I've found that they listen better and actually treat me as opposed to symptoms.

They probably aren't as good at killing other people, though.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

Interesting riff off the other thread, in that the other threat did NOT suggest that only men should have any particular job. Both have catchy titles that look like it may be a sexist thread, but only yours is actually and outright sexist in the content....

 

[southernhybrid]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

Interesting riff off the other thread, in that the other threat did NOT suggest that only men should have any particular job. Both have catchy titles that look like it may be a sexist thread, but only yours is actually and outright sexist in the content....

You don't have a sense of humor do you?

 

[southernhybrid]

I always prefer to go to women doctors. And it has nothing to do some kind of pervy thing...I save that for my wife.

I've found that they listen better and actually treat me as opposed to symptoms.

They probably aren't as good at killing other people, though.

Same here. Husband usually prefers female heath care providers because they listen and spend more time with him, which is exactly what the study found out.

 

[ronburgundy]

Oh joy, an entire new thread based upon the fallacious strawman that anyone has suggested that only men should be allowed in a particular profession (rather than the actual suggestion made that maybe we shouldn't try to force an equal number of men and women into every profession).

Why can't you just create a thread about some interesting research suggesting that women may make better physicians on average?

There is plenty of interesting stuff (most of not political) to discuss from that study regarding the many possible underlying factors that could produce such a result (such as everything from individual medical reasoning skills to inter-personal and communication skills with either the patients or other staff).

 

[Worldtraveller]

Somebody else doesn't have a sense of humor either.

Funny how the same people always seem to react to these things with the equivalent of "I'm not a racist, but..."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I always prefer to go to women doctors. And it has nothing to do some kind of pervy thing...I save that for my wife.

I've found that they listen better and actually treat me as opposed to symptoms.

They probably aren't as good at killing other people, though.

Second this. That's been my experience, also--they listen more. I also find they are gentler when doing things which aren't going to be pleasant.

 

[DBT]

Teamwork is good, it takes the strengths and weaknesses of individuals, male and female, working through problems as they arise.

 

[Toni]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

Interesting riff off the other thread, in that the other threat did NOT suggest that only men should have any particular job. Both have catchy titles that look like it may be a sexist thread, but only yours is actually and outright sexist in the content....

By asking a question? A question that followed the same idea as the question about what if men were better, only narrowed it down to a smaller and more particular field: medicine?

If this thread is sexist, why haven't you called out Metaphor's thread as sexist? That thread was much broader.

 

[Playball40]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

Interesting riff off the other thread, in that the other threat did NOT suggest that only men should have any particular job. Both have catchy titles that look like it may be a sexist thread, but only yours is actually and outright sexist in the content....

Wow. Put on your big girl panties!!

Seriously though, yes, the other thread was absolutely sexist in the content with an attempt to be veiled. We just saw through it.

 

[dismal]

If

a) women are better
b) women are the same as men

it follows that

c) men are better

By the transitive property.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Somebody else doesn't have a sense of humor either.

Funny how the same people always seem to react to these things with the equivalent of "I'm not a racist, but..."

You're not a racist but what?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

By asking a question? A question that followed the same idea as the question about what if men were better, only narrowed it down to a smaller and more particular field: medicine?

Except that it didn't. Can you see where it changed? That's the false motive and strawman this thread is all about. Nobody said women shouldn't do any job in that thread. This one asks if men should be excluded from particular jobs (it is actually sexist). I get that the writer thought she/he/it/zer was being funny by falsely insinuating sexism. Didn't get a laugh out of me, sorry.

If this thread is sexist, why haven't you called out Metaphor's thread as sexist? That thread was much broader.

That thread's title is sexist. I just said that above. The actual content of it? Not so much. It didn't say women shouldn't be allowed to do X or Y. It just said men on average are better at some things. And I did write in that thread that them being generally better at some things says nothing about any particular woman or any particular man. You should probably read the thread before you sling such accusations.

Seriously though, yes, the other thread was absolutely sexist in the content with an attempt to be veiled. We just saw through it.

"Seeing through" things, and proclaiming people to hold views they haven't stated (and likely don't hold) isn't going to get you anywhere, and I've been told it is a violation of this board's rules.

 

[Metaphor]

Seriously though, yes, the other thread was absolutely sexist in the content with an attempt to be veiled. We just saw through it.

What was sexist about my thread? Is it sexist to point to evidence that shows men have a higher average ability in a particular trait? If that's "sexist", then why is it wrong to be sexist? Why is it wrong to acknowledge facts?

 

[Metaphor]

What if women make better doctors than men? Does that mean that only women should be allowed to be physicians, NPs, PAs or even RNs?

No. Why would such a policy make sense, even if there was a group difference in averages?

In conclusions, I encourage you all to choose a female health provider because statistically speaking, women are better health care providers than men.

People are already free to indulge in whatever prejudices they want when choosing a health provider.

 

[southernhybrid]

You guys really need to lighten up. Do you not understand parody? Duh!

 

[Playball40]

Seriously though, yes, the other thread was absolutely sexist in the content with an attempt to be veiled. We just saw through it.

What was sexist about my thread? Is it sexist to point to evidence that shows men have a higher average ability in a particular trait? If that's "sexist", then why is it wrong to be sexist? Why is it wrong to acknowledge facts?

It's really not a fact though, is it? It can't TRULY be measured - not by test taking certainly. There are simply too many variables that cannot be accounted - so with such an insignificant disparity in the results, it cannot be stated to be fact.

It's a 'fact' their test results came out like this.......

It is not a 'fact' their assumptions based on those results are correct.

 

[Metaphor]

Seriously though, yes, the other thread was absolutely sexist in the content with an attempt to be veiled. We just saw through it.

What was sexist about my thread? Is it sexist to point to evidence that shows men have a higher average ability in a particular trait? If that's "sexist", then why is it wrong to be sexist? Why is it wrong to acknowledge facts?

It's really not a fact though, is it? It can't TRULY be measured - not by test taking certainly. There are simply too many variables that cannot be accounted - so with such an insignificant disparity in the results, it cannot be stated to be fact.

It's a 'fact' their test results came out like this.......

It is not a 'fact' their assumptions based on those results are correct.

Of course it can be measured. Psychologists have measured mental abilities for over a century.

 

[Jarhyn]

If women are better at some jobs, the world may never know because of the extant culture that denies the possibility of that coming to the top.

At any rate, I don't think prejudiced pigeon-holeing is good for everyone. Thus my answer is the same: blind the eye that evaluates the application to all information not germane to the role (such as gender) so that everyone can be seen as individuals, and randomly drop some fraction of the applicants in pools that we are culturally biased towards.

Then let the evaluator lick the most qualified applications he or she sees for interview or even just pick a random applicant from that pool as interviews have in several studies been shown to have no benefit to getting qualified workers.