Approaching diversity and inclusion in the radiology department

Current diversity in radiology: A comparative study

PURPOSE

To compare the demographic characteristics of active physicians, trainees, medical school clinical sciences faculty, and department chairs in radiology with those in other medical specialties.

METHODS

An analysis was conducted using publicly available deidentified aggregate data from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Our data collection included information from the 2022 AAMC Physician Specialty Data Report, the 2022 AAMC Report on Residents, and the 2022 AAMC Faculty Roster. We examined factors such as graduation country, gender, and self-identified race/ethnicity. MedCalc software was used for the analyses.

RESULTS

Compared to other specialties, active radiologists exhibited a significantly lower percentage of females, International Medical Graduates (IMGs), individuals of American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) descent, Black/African-American individuals, and individuals of Hispanic/Latino/Spanish origin. Conversely, the proportion of White active radiologists was higher. Among radiology trainees, there was a notably lower percentages of females, IMGs, individuals of Black/African-American descent, and individuals of Hispanic/Latino/Spanish origin, while the percentage of Asians was significantly higher. Furthermore, medical school radiology faculty showed a significant lower proportion of females, Black/African-American individuals, Hispanic/Latino/Spanish individuals, and individuals categorized under the white race/ethnicity, with Asians having a higher representation. As radiology department chairs, Asians were noted at significantly lower percentages compared to their proportions among medical school radiology faculty, while Black/African-American individuals were observed at significantly higher percentages in the same comparison.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a notable underrepresentation of females, individuals of Black/African-American descent, and those of Hispanic/Latino/Spanish origin among active radiologists, radiology trainees, and medical school radiology faculty when compared to their counterparts in other medical specialties. Given these findings, further investigation into the underlying causes of these disparities is warranted.

The Influence of Extracurricular Activities on Radiology Resident Selection Decisions

PURPOSE

Extracurricular activities (EAs) listed on radiology residency applications can signal traits and characteristics desired in holistic reviews. The authors conducted an objective analysis to determine the influence of EAs on resident selection decisions.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment was designed to model radiology resident selection and determine the relative weights of EAs among academic and demographic application factors. Faculty members involved in resident selection at 30 US radiology programs chose between hypothetical pairs of applicant profiles between October 2021 and February 2022. Each applicant profile included one of 22 EAs chosen for study. A conditional logistic regression model assessed the relative weights of the attributes and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-four participants completed the exercise. Community-service EAs were ranked most highly by participants. LGBTQ Pride Alliance (OR, 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.15; P = .006) and Young Republicans (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.82; P = .001) significantly influenced decisions. The highest ranked EAs were significantly preferred over the lowest ranked EAs (OR, 1.916; 95% CI, 1.671-2.197; P < .001). Participants preferred EAs that reflected active over passive engagement (OR, 1.154; 95% CI, 1.022-1.304; P = .021) and progressive over conservative ideology (OR, 1.280; 95% CI, 1.133-1.447; P < .001). Participants who ranked progressive EAs more highly preferred applicants with progressive EAs (P < .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of EAs on resident selection decisions is significant and likely to gain importance in resident selection as medical student performance metrics are further eliminated. Applicants and selection committees should consider this influence and the bias that EAs can bring to resident selection decisions.

Unintended Consequence: Diversity as a Casualty of Eliminating United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scores

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to use a discrete-choice experiment to model the trade-offs evaluators make between academic attributes and demographics when the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 switches to pass/fail.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment was administered to faculty members from a geographically diverse mix of 14 academic and community radiology departments in the United States from August through November 2020. Reviewers reviewed 10 applicant pairs with numeric Step 1 scores (part 1) and 10 applicant pairs with a pass Step 1 result (part 2). Applicant attributes included medical school rank, gender, race/ethnicity, USMLE Step 1 score, USMLE Step 2 score, class rank, clerkship honors, and publications. Conditional logistic regression modeled the influence of attribute levels.

RESULTS

Two hundred twelve evaluators completed the study (response rate 59%). The most influential attribute was Step 1 score in part 1 and medical school rank in part 2. The relative importance of race/ethnicity and gender decreased by 25% and 29%, respectively, when Step 1 switches to pass/fail. Evaluators weigh race/ethnicity the strongest when applicants have the same Step 1 score (preference weights of 0.85 for African American, 1.42 for Hispanic, and 0 for White and Asian applicants). Race/ethnicity is relatively more important when Step 1 scores are higher (preference weights of 1.58 for African American, 0.90 for Hispanic, and 0 for White and Asian applicants).

CONCLUSIONS

The loss of numeric Step 1 scores reduced the residency evaluator preference for diversity. Reviewers prioritize underrepresented-in-medicine applicants when Step 1 scores are higher and comparable with White and Asian applicants.