Exploring Unconscious Bias at International Kidney Conference

Key Points Male moderators were less likely than female moderators to introduce speakers with professional titles. Associate professor moderators were more likely to introduce professor speakers with professional titles, regardless of gender. Basic science sessions showed the lowest rates of formal speaker introduction among sessions. Background The effect of unconscious biases on academic interactions has gained increasing attention across several disciplines, including the field of medicine. We explored the possible manifestation of these biases by analyzing presenters' introductions by moderators at the American Society of Nephrology Kidney Week Conferences. Methods We analyzed 1534 archived sessions from American Society of Nephrology Kidney Weeks 2019, 2021, and 2023. Moderator and speaker gender, academic rank, session type, and presence of formal titles in introductions were documented. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the relationship between these characteristics and the frequency of formal title usage by moderators. Results Female moderators used formal titles more frequently than their male counterparts across all years (estimate 0.60, SEM=0.18, P < 0.05). Title usage was higher in 2021 (virtual format) compared with in 2019 and 2023 (est. 0.76, SEM=0.25, P < 0.001). However, there was a significant increase from 2019 to 2023 (est. 0.74, SEM=0.24, P < 0.001). With respect to rank interactions, full Professors introducing Associate Professors (est. 0.82, SEM=0.35, P < 0.05) and vice versa (est. 0.62, SEM=0.40, P < 0.05) both had higher probabilities of formal title usage. On the other hand, Assistant Professors introducing other Assistant Professors showed a lower likelihood of using a full title (est. −0.83, SEM=0.35, P < 0.05). Basic science sessions exhibited the lowest rates across all years ( P < 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest that unconscious bias may exist in peer-to-peer interactions in nephrology academic circles. Further investigation is warranted to explore the interplay of additional variables such as geographic and cultural characteristics to more clearly understand the extent of this issue and develop interventions that mitigate bias and promote equity in academic settings.