Intersectional Mistreatment Across Key Stages in Medical Education: A Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy
This study utilizes a multilevel intersectional analysis of Brazilian medical students to demonstrate that mistreatment prevalence varies significantly across training stages and is dynamically shaped by the intersection of social identities, particularly affecting LGBTQ+ students and revealing shifting racial disparities between basic and clinical phases.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Medical school is often imagined as a rigorous journey of intellectual discovery, where future doctors master the complexities of the human body. Yet, for many students, the training environment is also a place where they face harassment, humiliation, and abuse. This phenomenon, known as mistreatment, is not just a personal hardship; it is a systemic issue embedded in the hidden curriculum of medical education. The hidden curriculum refers to the unwritten rules, unspoken values, and informal behaviors that students absorb simply by observing how faculty and senior staff interact with one another. In this environment, a rigid hierarchy often places students at the bottom, creating a power dynamic where unprofessional behavior can be normalized as a necessary part of the learning process. While previous research has shown that women, racial minorities, and LGBTQ+ individuals are at higher risk of mistreatment, these studies have typically looked at each group separately. They have treated identity as a list of independent factors, such as being a woman or being Black, rather than examining how these identities overlap and interact to shape a student's unique experience. Understanding this intersection is crucial because the way a person is treated often depends on the specific combination of who they are, not just one single part of their identity.
A team of researchers in Brazil set out to investigate this complex reality by studying medical students across two major institutions. They wanted to move beyond simple comparisons and instead look at how different social identities—specifically gender, race, sexual orientation, and the stage of medical training—combine to create vulnerability. To do this, they surveyed 685 students, asking them about their experiences with insults, threats, sexual harassment, and physical aggression over the past year. The researchers grouped the students into 35 distinct categories based on their specific mix of identities, such as a White lesbian woman in her final year of clinical training or a Black heterosexual man in his first year of basic science. By analyzing these groups together, they could see patterns that would remain invisible if they only looked at gender or race in isolation.
The results revealed a stark picture of the medical training landscape. Overall, nearly 70% of the students reported experiencing some form of mistreatment. This problem was not evenly distributed; it grew significantly worse as students advanced in their training. In the early years of basic science, just over half of the students reported mistreatment, but by the time they reached their clinical clerkships, where they work directly with patients and hospital staff, that number jumped to over 80%. The data showed that students who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or another non-heterosexual orientation consistently faced higher rates of mistreatment than their heterosexual peers, regardless of their gender or race. Similarly, women reported more mistreatment than men.
Perhaps the most revealing finding concerned how race and gender interacted at different stages of training. In the early years of school, White women reported higher frequencies of mistreatment than Black and Brown women. This counterintuitive result, the researchers suggest, may be linked to a cultural phenomenon in Brazil known as the myth of racial democracy, which often leads Black and Brown individuals to minimize or fail to recognize racial discrimination, making them less likely to report it. However, this gap disappeared during the clinical clerkship stage, where mistreatment rates became high for women of all racial backgrounds. The group with the lowest predicted risk of mistreatment was heterosexual men in the early basic science stage, while the highest risks were concentrated among women with non-heterosexual sexual orientations, particularly those in advanced clinical training.
The study used a sophisticated statistical approach to determine whether these differences were simply the sum of separate factors or if the combination of identities created unique effects. The analysis showed that the vast majority of the differences in mistreatment rates could be explained by looking at the specific intersection of a student's identity and their training stage. This means that a student's risk is not just about being a woman or being in a clinical rotation; it is about the specific experience of being a woman in a clinical rotation, or a gay man in a specific year of school. The researchers found that while the main factors like gender and training stage explained most of the variation, the specific combinations of identities still played a measurable role in shaping the student's reality.
These findings suggest that efforts to stop mistreatment in medical schools must be more nuanced than current approaches. Policies that address only one form of discrimination, such as sexism or racism, may miss the mark because they do not account for how these forces combine. The researchers argue that medical schools need to implement training that helps faculty and staff recognize these intersecting biases and the power dynamics that fuel them. They also call for safer, anonymous reporting systems that protect students from retaliation, especially in the high-stakes environment of clinical rotations. Furthermore, they highlight the need for national policies that ensure equitable access to medical education for transgender and non-binary individuals, who were too few in number in this study to be analyzed separately but face significant barriers to entry. Ultimately, the study demonstrates that the path to becoming a doctor is shaped by a complex web of social identities, and creating a safe learning environment requires understanding and addressing the specific ways these identities intersect.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.