Cited by 1,460Social and Intergroup PsychologyDiversity and Career in MedicineRacial and Ethnic Identity Research

Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for Black and White patients

Open access
Green, Alexander R., Carney, Dana R., Pallin, Daniel J., Ngo, Long H., Raymond, Kristal L., Iezzoni, Lisa I., Banaji, Mahzarin R.·2007·Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract

CONTEXT: Studies documenting racial/ethnic disparities in health care frequently implicate physicians' unconscious biases. No study to date has measured physicians' unconscious racial bias to test whether this predicts physicians' clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: To test whether physicians show implicit race bias and whether the magnitude of such bias predicts thrombolysis recommendations for black and white patients with acute coronary syndromes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An internet-based tool comprising a clinical vignette of a patient presenting to the emergency department with an acute coronary syndrome, followed by a questionnaire and three Implicit Association Tests (IATs). Study invitations were e-mailed to all internal medicine and emergency medicine residents at four academic medical centers in Atlanta and Boston; 287 completed the study, met inclusion criteria, and were randomized to either a black or white vignette patient. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: IAT scores (normal continuous variable) measuring physicians' implicit race preference and perceptions of cooperativeness. Physicians' attribution of symptoms to coronary artery disease for vignette patients with randomly assigned race, and their decisions about thrombolysis. Assessment of physicians' explicit racial biases by questionnaire. RESULTS: Physicians reported no explicit preference for white versus black patients or differences in perceived cooperativeness. In contrast, IATs revealed implicit preference favoring white Americans (mean IAT score = 0.36, P < .001, one-sample t test) and implicit stereotypes of black Americans as less cooperative with medical procedures (mean IAT score 0.22, P < .001), and less cooperative generally (mean IAT score 0.30, P < .001). As physicians' prowhite implicit bias increased, so did their likelihood of treating white patients and not treating black patients with thrombolysis (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first evidence of unconscious (implicit) race bias among physicians, its dissociation from conscious (explicit) bias, and its predictive validity. Results suggest that physicians' unconscious biases may contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in use of medical procedures such as thrombolysis for myocardial infarction.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Four studies examining the correlation between IAT scores and responses to clinical vignettes found a significant correlation between high levels of pro-white implicit bias and treatment responses that favoured patients specified as white.

    “Four studies examining the correlation between IAT scores and responses to clinical vignettes found a significant correlation between high levels of pro-white implicit bias and treatment responses that favoured patients specified as white [42, 45–47].”
  • Implicit biases are linked to discriminatory outcomes ranging from poorer quality interactions to constrained employment opportunities and a decreased likelihood of receiving life-saving emergency medical treatments.

    “accumulating evidence reveals that implicit biases are linked to discriminatory outcomes ranging from the seemingly mundane, such as poorer quality interactions (McConnell & Leibold, 2001), to the obviously consequential, such as constrained employment opportunities (Bertrand & Malainathan, 2004) and a decreased likelihood of receiving life-saving emergency medical treatments (Green et al., 2007).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [27]Betancourt J Not me! Doctors, decisions, and disparities in health care Cardiovas Rev Rep 2004 25 3 105 109 Betancourt J. Not me! Doctors, decisions, and disparities in health care. Cardiovas Rev Rep. 2004;25(3):105–9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Green, A. R., Carney, D. R., Pallin, D. J., Ngo, L. H., Raymond, K. L., Iezzoni, L. I., & Banaji, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Green, Alexander R.
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published
2007-06-27
Volume
22
Issue
9
Pages
1231-1238
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
OpenAlex
W2060824655
Cited by
1,460
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 124 · 2022: 109 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 97 · 2018: 98 · 2017: 93 · 2016: 83 · 2015: 93 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 47
FWCI
125.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital
  • Massachusetts General Hospital
  • Emory University
  • Harvard University
  • Mind Science Foundation
  • U.S. Public Health Service (T32 HP11001-15)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL-0000013)
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
Keywords
implicit bias, racial bias, physicians, thrombolysis, acute coronary syndrome, racial disparities, Implicit Association Test, emergency medicine residents, internal medicine residents, Black patients, myocardial infarction, stereotyping, clinical decision-making
MeSH terms
Adult, Black or African American, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Physicians, Predictive Value of Tests, Prejudice, Surveys and Questionnaires, Thrombolytic Therapy, Black People, White People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review