A teaching portfolio (TP) is a document containing a factual description of a teacher's teaching strengths and accomplishments, allowing clinicians to display them for examination by others. The primary aim of a TP is to improve quality of teaching by providing a structure for self-reflection, which in turn aids professional development in medical education. Contents typically include a personal statement on teaching, an overview of teaching accomplishments and activities, feedback from colleagues and learners, a reflective component and some examples of teaching material. Electronic portfolios are more portable and flexible compared to paper portfolios. Clinicians gain the most benefit from a TP when it is used as a tool for self-reflection of their teaching practice and not merely as a list of activities and achievements. This article explains why and how anaesthetists might use a TP as a tool for professional development in medical education.

Applicability of DTTs to specific alternate settings should be considered in context, and appropriately designed justification studies are warranted to demonstrate efficacy.

Background: Women face gender-based challenges in their medical education and career. Inequitable access to procedural training, a confidence gap, and professional identity deficit have been shown. We made a gender comparison of procedural case volume, confidence for independent practice, perceived gender and ethnic bias, and professional identity in Australasian anaesthesia trainees. Methods: An online, voluntary, anonymous survey using SurveyMonkey® was delivered to Australasian anaesthesia trainees. Information collected included demographics, experience and confidence in 12 anaesthetic procedures, assessments relating to confidence and professional identity, and perceived gender and ethnic bias. Gender differences were evaluated. Results: Three hundred and fifty-six trainees (22.2%) of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) responded. Male trainees reported a higher number (standard deviation) of procedures performed greater than 10 times (men 4.45 [2.55], women 3.78 [1.95]; P<0.001 adjusted for training level). Men were more likely to rate themselves at a training competency above their actual training level (men 18.6%, women 7.8%; P¼0.004) and exaggerate procedural experience to supervisors (men 30.8%, women 11.8%; P<0.001). Final-year male trainees felt significantly more prepared for independent practice (P¼0.021, trend across ordered responses). Women reported significantly higher levels of gender bias exhibited by patients (men 1.1%, women 84.5%; P<0.001) and in training overall (men 10.3%, women 55.3%; P<0.001), which was compounded in women with an ethnic minority background. Conclusions: A discrepancy exists between the number of procedures performed by male and female anaesthesia trainees in Australia and New Zealand. Relative male overconfidence may be a major contributing factor to the gender confidence gap.