Litcius/Paper detail

The nature and validity of implicit bias training for health care providers and trainees: A systematic review

Nao Hagiwara, Conor Duffy, John Cyrus, Nadia Harika, G. S. Watson, Tiffany Green

2024Science Advances20 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

The number of health care educational institutions/organizations adopting implicit bias training is growing. Our systematic review of 77 studies (published 1 January 2003 through 21 September 2022) investigated how implicit bias training in health care is designed/delivered and whether gaps in knowledge translation compromised the reliability and validity of the training. The primary training target was race/ethnicity (49.3%); trainings commonly lack specificity on addressing implicit prejudice or stereotyping (67.5%). They involved a combination of hands-on and didactic approaches, lasting an average of 343.15 min, often delivered in a single day (53.2%). Trainings also exhibit translational gaps, diverging from current literature (10 to 67.5%), and lack internal (99.9%), face (93.5%), and external (100%) validity. Implicit bias trainings in health care are characterized by bias in methodological quality and translational gaps, potentially compromising their impacts.

Topics & Concepts

Prejudice (legal term)Implicit biasInternal validityFace validityHealth careReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyExternal validityQuality (philosophy)ValidityMedical educationApplied psychologyMEDLINEKnowledge translationTraining (meteorology)Social psychologyMedicineClinical psychologyComputer scienceKnowledge managementPsychometricsPolitical scienceMeteorologyLawEpistemologyPathologyPower (physics)Quantum mechanicsPhilosophyPhysicsInnovations in Medical EducationCultural Competency in Health CareMedical Education and Admissions
The nature and validity of implicit bias training for health care providers and trainees: A systematic review | Litcius