Sex Differences in Authorship of Major Gastroenterology Society Guidelines and Technical Reviews

Analysis of Pediatric Clinical Practice Guideline Authors by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity

Background and Objectives: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have significantly influenced medical practice worldwide. Nevertheless, the authorship of CPGs produced by several medical societies has not been representative of the field and population they address, as women and individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups have been underrepresented as authors. We hypothesized that women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups would also be underrepresented as authors of CPGs produced by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the gender, race, and ethnic composition of authors and subcommittee participants of AAP-produced CPGs published from January 2010 through May 2023 were analyzed and compared to the 2010 and 2021 U.S. population and 2010 and 2022 U.S. medical school pediatric faculty. Results: Women (39.7%, 127/320 of all positions, and 42.5%, 85/200 of named author positions) and women physicians (35.2%, 101/287 of all positions, and 36.4%, 64/176 of named author positions) were significantly underrepresented-while men and men physicians were significantly overrepresented-from their respective composition in the U.S. Census and pediatric faculty. Women and women physicians from all racial and ethnic groups and men and men physicians from minority racial and ethnic groups were significantly underrepresented-from their respective composition in the U.S. Census and pediatric faculty. No Black man was identified as an author. Conclusions: Medical societies that produce CPGs should be cognizant of these inequities and ensure appropriate authorship diversity.

Gender disparity between first and senior authors on liver cancer research in the top journals of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

BACKGROUND

Gender disparity is pervasive in academic medicine. This study aimed to assess the disparity between men and women with regard to first and senior author positions in primary studies on liver cancer over the last two decades.

METHODS

We conducted a review of articles published in high-impact factor journals of the field of Gastroenterology and Hepatology in 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. First and senior authors of all ages were considered as the study population. The authors' genders were determined using the online artificial intelligence tool genderize.io (https://genderize.io/). The disparity between men and women authors was assessed using the linear-by-linear association test.

RESULTS

665 original articles from 10 journals were reviewed. The point prevalence of first women authors was 25.0% compared with 75.0% for men. The point prevalence of senior women authors was 16.3% compared with 83.7% for men. From 2000 to 2020, the proportion of first women authors increased 14.4% to 26.8% compared with 85.6%-73.2% for men (P = 0.009), and the proportion of senior women authors increased from 7.4% to 19.5%, compared with 92.6%-80.5% for men (P = 0.035). The factor independently associated with a reduced representation of women among first authors was the region of author. The factor independently associated with a reduced representation of women among senior authors was the impact factor of journals.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicated a remarkable increase in the proportion of women, both first and senior authors, over the past two decades in the field of liver cancers. However, the representation of women authors in this area is far less than that of men.

Gender differences in the authorship of Global Major Gastroenterology Society Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Gender differences remain a serious issue in the gastroenterology field, which negatively affect the career success and academic advancement of female gastroenterologists. In this study, we aim to identify gender differences in the authors of global major Gastroenterology Society guidelines.

METHODS

We included six associations and collected guidelines published between 2003 and 2022. The genders of authors were determined and recorded for each guideline. Linear by linear association test was used to assess trends every 5 years.

RESULTS

We included 210 guidelines and 461 authors. The proportion of female first and senior authors was 11.3% and 9.8%, respectively. The number of female first and senior authors in most societies has improved over the past 20 years, with the largest increase in the AGA.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are still underrepresented among the authors of guidelines. Although gender differences have gained more attention in recent years, there are many obstacles to achieving gender equality.

Representation of Authors by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity in Pathology Clinical Practice Guidelines

CONTEXT.—

United States' clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are often produced by professional societies and used worldwide in daily medical practice. However, studies in various medical specialties demonstrate underrepresentation of women and racial and ethnic minority groups in CPGs. The representation of authors by gender, race, and ethnicity of US pathology CPGs has not been previously evaluated.

OBJECTIVE.—

To assess if women and individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups are underrepresented as authors of pathology CPGs.

DESIGN.—

The gender, race, ethnicity, and terminal degrees of authors of 18 CPGs from the College of American Pathologists were coded by using photographs and other available information online and compared to their representation in academic pathology per Association of American Medical Colleges benchmark data.

RESULTS.—

Two hundred seventy-five author positions (202 physician author positions) were analyzed. Women overall (119 of 275; 43.3%) and women physicians (65 of 202; 32.2%) held fewer positions than all men and men physicians. Women physicians were significantly underrepresented in physician author positions, while White men physicians were significantly overrepresented in all, first, senior, and corresponding authorship roles when compared to the proportion of women and White men physicians among pathology faculty, respectively. Asian men and women physicians were underrepresented as compared to their representation among pathology faculty.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Men, particularly White men physicians, are overrepresented among pathology CPG author positions, while women physicians and some physicians from racial and ethnic minority groups are underrepresented. Further research is needed to understand the impact of these findings on the careers of underrepresented physicians and the content of guidelines.

A Systematic Review of Gender Disparity in the Authorship of Clinical Trials and Clinical Practice Guidelines in Various Medicine Subspecialties

Authorship in clinical trials and clinical practice guidelines is considered prestigious and is associated with broader peer recognition. This systematic review investigated female representation among studies reporting authorship trends in clinical trials or clinical practice guidelines in different medicine subspecialties. Our search strategy yielded 836 articles, of which 30 met the inclusion criteria. Our findings indicate that females are severely underrepresented in authorship of clinical trials and clinical practice guidelines. Although the proportions of females may have improved in the past decade, the gains are marginal. Notably, studies in this domain predominantly focus on first/last authorship positions, and whether females are underrepresented in other positions as collaborative partners is currently unknown. Also, authorship trends in clinical trials or clinical practice guidelines of most medicine subspecialties besides cardiovascular medicine remain under-researched. Hence, standardizing the methodology for studying gender disparity in research output for comparative analysis between different subspecialties is as urgent as addressing the gender disparity in authorship.

Gender authorship trends of gastric cancer in the top journals of gastroenterology: A 20-year perspective

Gender authorship trends have been explored in varied medical specialties, and no study had observed in the field of gastric cancer. Therefore, we aimed to access whether the "gender gap" in authorship existed in gastric cancer in the leading gastroenterological journals over the last 2 decades. All original articles published from 2000 to 2020 in 9 leading gastroenterological journals were collected. Information on the first and senior author's gender, country of author's institution, and impact factor of journals were collected. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used for data analysis. A total of 5785 original articles were included and analyzed, of which 440 (7.61%) were articles on gastric cancer and 5345 (92.39%) covered other topics. Fewer female authors published original articles as first (19.32%, 85/440) and senior authors (14.32%, 63/440) compared with males. Remarkably, a significant increase in female authorship was discovered. The proportion of female first authors grown from 12.99% to 30.89% during the last 20 years (P < .001), but not in senior authors (P = .175). Multivariable logistic analysis showed that female first authors demonstrated a higher percentage when senior authors were female (odds ratio, 2.040; 95% confidence interval, 1.105-3.769). Although a statistically ascending tendency in female first authors on gastric cancer has been going on over the last 20 years, the exorbitant gender gap still exists. This gap may help explain the continued underrepresentation of women within both clinical work and academic research, and prompt us to look further for the underlying causes.

The representation of women on Australian clinical practice guideline panels, 2010-2020

OBJECTIVES

To assess the composition by gender of Australian clinical practice guideline development panels; to explore guideline development-related factors that influence the composition of panels.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Survey of clinical guidelines published in Australia during 2010-2020 that observed the 2016 NHMRC Standards for Guidelines, identified (June 2021) in the NHMRC Clinical Practice Guideline Portal or by searching the Guideline International Network guidelines library, the Trip medical database, and PubMed. The gender of contributors to guideline development was inferred from gendered titles (guideline documents) or pronouns (online biographies).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The overall proportion of guideline panel members - the guideline contributors who formally considered evidence and formulated recommendations (ie, guideline panel chairs and members) - who were women.

RESULTS

Of 406 eligible guidelines, 335 listed the names of people who contributed to their development (82%). Of 7472 named contributors (including 511 guideline panel chairs [6.8%] and 5039 guideline panel members [67.4%]), 3514 were men (47.0%), 3345 were women (44.8%), and gender could not be determined for 612 (8.2%). A total of 215 guideline panel chairs were women (42.1%), 280 were men (54.8%); 2566 guideline panel members were men (50.9%), 2071 were women (41.1%). The proportion of female guideline panel members was smaller than 40% for 179 guidelines (53%) and larger than 60% for 71 guidelines (21%). The median guideline proportion of female panel members was smaller than 50% for all but two years (2017, 2018).

CONCLUSIONS

The representation of women in health leadership roles in Australia does not reflect their level of participation in the health care workforce. In particular, clinical guideline development bodies should develop transparent policies for increasing the participation of women in guideline development panels.

Gender Representation Among Physician Authors of Practice Guidelines Developed, Endorsed, or Affirmed by the American Academy of Neurology

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To assess American Academy of Neurology (AAN)-recommended Practice Guidelines (PGs) for equity in gender representation among physician authors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included AAN-recommended PG publications from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020. Author degrees and gender were identified by 2 reviewers using the publication and/or online searches. Gender was determined from pronouns or photographs. Gender representation was compared with Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) data on academic neurologists. Data were analyzed using Z tests of 2 proportions and descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

AAMC benchmarks report academic women neurologists represented 35% of the specialty in 2015, 38% in 2018, and 39% in 2020. We identified 68 unique PG publications with 709 physician authors, 31% (223) women, 68% (484) men, and 0.3% (2) gender could not be identified. Representation of women physicians was low among PG authors across all benchmarks, significantly so for 2018 and 2020 (p < 0.01). Among physician first authors, women were significantly underrepresented across all benchmarks (18% [12/65], p < 0.01). Representation of women physicians was lower when men physicians were first authors vs women physicians (31% [161/524] vs 43% [50/118], p = 0.02). Among subspecialties with 10+ PGs, women physician authorship was highest in child neurology (48% [57/120]) and lowest in stroke and vascular neurology (16% [18/113]).

DISCUSSION

We found that women physicians were underrepresented as authors of AAN-recommended PGs. This suggests a missed opportunity for neurology because PGs that include expertise from women physicians may improve care and translation into practice. In addition, women physicians lose out on professional development from authorship. Further research is needed to understand causality and address gaps.

Gender-Specific Attitudes of Internal Medicine Residents Toward Gastroenterology

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Female representation among gastroenterology (GI) fellows has remained around 30%, yet women comprise over 50% of internal medicine (IM) residents. We aim to identify the gender-specific barriers of IM residents toward pursuing GI.

METHODS

We surveyed IM residents in the Northeast by emailing 168 IM programs a survey link to be distributed to their residents. A 4-point Likert barrier scale and bivariate analysis were performed with "yes" and "no," where "yes" was analyzed as "somewhat of a barrier" and above. Females received a third table assessing female-specific barriers. Significance was set at < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of 215 survey responses, 56.3% (n = 121) were female. Response rate could not be determined due to resident identity protection and inconsistent responses of survey dissemination from programs. Females had significantly greater concerns about fertility, maternity leave, radiation exposure, work-life balance, stress, and burnout compared to males (p < 0.05). For females, 48.7% felt a lack of gender diversity in GI, 54.6% felt a lack of female GI mentors, and 43.7% felt there is a lack of respect as a female in GI. No gender differences existed in motivation to pursue GI, exposure to GI, and access to GI mentors, or GI-related research.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that female IM trainees had greater concerns surrounding fertility, radiation exposure, and maternity leave compared to male IM trainees. Lack of gender diversity and lack of female GI mentors were noted barriers for female IM trainees. Addressing these barriers may help increase female representation in GI.

Author Diversity on Clinical Practice Guideline Committees

ABSTRACT

Reports have demonstrated that women overall and women physicians, in particular, are underrepresented as authors of clinical practice guidelines. This analysis used publicly available information to explore the diversity of rehabilitation-related clinical practice guideline authors by gender, race, and ethnicity. Primary analysis identified authors' gender, race, ethnicity, and visible minority status. Two sets were analyzed: (1) clinical practice guidelines by Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) categorized as "Rehabilitation" or "Pain" (n = 7; VA clinical practice guidelines) and (2) a set (n = 10) published in the United States (US) from 2019 to 2021 that were selected because of low numbers of inclusion at less than 20% women authors. Key findings include that among physician authors, both the VA and US clinical practice guidelines underrepresented women (15 [24.2%] and 27 [16.7%], respectively) and those coded as a racial or ethnic minority were particularly underrepresented. Notably, women authors overall were equally represented (92 [50.0%]) in the VA clinical practice guidelines. The US clinical practice guidelines had women authors who were underrepresented (36 [19.0%]). Secondary analysis of the entire set of VA clinical practice guidelines (n = 21) found gaps in diversity-related content. Clinical practice guidelines have far-reaching health and economic impacts, and addressing disparities in the diversity of author teams and/or gaps in diversity-related content is of paramount importance.

The Under-representation of Canadian Women in Gastroenterology from Residency to Leadership

Background

To determine representation of women in gastroenterology (GI) at residency and leadership levels in Canada.

Methods

The Canadian Resident Matching Service provided data for internal medicine (IM), general surgery (GS), GI and cardiology applicant cycles 2014 to 2018. Z-tests were used to compare proportion of women entering each residency program. An internet search was conducted to calculate percentages of women as GI association presidents, residency program directors, division heads and oral speakers at conferences.

Results

IM residency had on average of 1789 applicants with 487 matched (49.4% versus 49.5% women). GS residency had on average 357 applicants with 90 matched (41% versus 54.4% women). GI residency had on average 46 applicants with 34 matched (37% versus 35.3% women). Cardiology residency had on average 76 applicants with 54 matched (29% versus 27.8% women).

The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) has had two out of 47 (4.2%) women presidents. The Ontario Association of Gastroenterology (OAG) has had no women presidents (0/9). The Association des gastro-entérologues du Québec (AGEQ) has had two out of 15 (13%) women presidents. The Alberta Society of Gastroenterology (ASG) has had one out of five (20%) women presidents. From 2018 to 2020, university division heads ranged from 0% to 13.3% women (0 to 2/15). University GI training program directors ranged from 28.6% to 35.7% (4 to 5/14). Women speakers at CAG’s annual conference varied 27% to 42% from 2016 to 2020, averaging 32.7%. Women speakers at OAG’s, AGEQ’s and ASG’s annual conferences averaged 23.3%, 24.1% and 35%, respectively.

Conclusion

Women gastroenterologists display low representation at multiple levels along the GI career pathway.