Has a critical mass of women resulted in gender equity in gynecologic surgery?

Race, Ethnicity, and Sex Representation Trends Among Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery Fellowship Trainees and Graduates

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To study the race, ethnicity, and sex representation and annual trends of AAGL FMIGS fellows and graduates.

DESIGN

A retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

AAMC databases were queried for demographic information between 2011 and 2023.

PATIENTS/SUBJECTS

AAGL FMIGS fellows and graduates.

INTERVENTIONS

N/A MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Descriptive statistical analysis and the actual-to-expected (AE) ratio of each race, ethnicity, and sex were performed. AE ratio was calculated by dividing the 13-year average actual percentage of FMIGS trainees and graduates by the expected percentage based demographics of OBGYN residents and the US general population. 477 fellows graduated or were in training between 2011 and 2023; race and ethnicity information was obtained for 347 (72.7%) individuals, and sex information was available for 409 (85.7%). Representation of females ranged from 66.7% in 2017 to 93.3% in 2022. There was a significantly increasing slope for the representation of females (+1.3% per year; 95% CI 0.00-0.03; p = .027). Compared to their distribution among US OBGYN residents, White fellows' representation was lower [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.60 (0.44-0.81)] and of Asian fellows was higher [AE ratio, 95% CI 2.17 (1.47-3.21)]. Female fellows' representation was lower than expected [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.68 (0.48-0.96)] compared to their distribution among US OBGYN residents. Compared to the general US population, White fellows [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.65 (0.48-0.87)] and Hispanic fellows [AE ratio, 95% CI 0.53 (0.34-0.83)] representation was lower. Asian fellows' representation was higher compared to the general US population [AE ratio, 95% CI 5.87 (3.48-9.88)].

CONCLUSION

White and Hispanic fellows' representation was lower than expected, while Asian fellows' representation was higher in AAGL-accredited FMIGS programs. Female representation increased throughout the years, but overall, female fellows' representation was lower than expected compared to their distribution among OBGYN residents. These findings may help develop equitable recruitment strategies for FMIGS programs and reduce health disparities within complex gynecology.

The Role of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Shaping Gender-diverse Leadership in Medicine

Gender inequity persists in academic medicine. This article reviews the historical context, ongoing leadership challenges, and societal biases. The persistent barriers to gender equity in leadership roles, pay, and professional recognition are considered through the lens of obstetrics and gynecology where these issues persist despite a significant presence of women in the field. The impact of gender stereotypes, the role of intersectionality, and the need for systemic change are evident. Embracing diverse leadership styles and creating inclusive pathways to leadership will help actualize the potential benefits of a gender-diverse workforce, enhancing health care outcomes and fostering innovation.

How do we treat our male and female patients? - A primer on gender-based health care inequities

Health is a fundamental human right, yet disparities in healthcare, based on gender, persist for women. These inequities stem from a patriarchal society that has regarded men as the default standard, leading to women being treated merely as smaller men. Contributing to these disparities are the gender stereotypes that pervade our society. Women possess differences in anatomy, physiology, psychology and social experience than men. To achieve health equity, it is vital to understand and be open to consider and evaluate these aspects in each individual patient. This requires an understanding of our own biases and a commitment to valuing diversity in both patient and caregiver. Improving equity and diversity throughout all aspects of the medical system will be necessary to provide optimal patient care for all.

Workplace microaggressions: results of a survey of the American College of Surgeons members

BACKGROUND

Workplace microaggressions are a longstanding but understudied problem in the surgical specialties. Microaggressions in health care are linked to negative emotional and physical health outcomes and can contribute to burnout and suboptimal delivery of patient care. They also negatively impact recruitment, retention, and promotion, which often results in attrition. Further attrition at the time of an impending surgical workforce shortage risks compromising the delivery of health care to the diverse US population, and may jeopardize the financial stability of health care organizations. To date, studies on microaggressions have consisted of small focus groups comprising women faculty or trainees at a single institution. To our knowledge, there are no large, multiorganizational, gender-inclusive studies on microaggressions experienced by practicing surgeons.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the demographic and occupational characteristics of surgeons who do and do not report experiencing workplace microaggressions and whether these experiences would influence a decision to pursue a career in surgery again.

STUDY DESIGN

We developed and internally validated a web-based survey to assess surgeon experiences with microaggressions and the associated sequelae. The survey was distributed through a convenience sample of 9 American College of Surgeons online Communities from November 2022 to January 2023. All American College of Surgeons Communities comprised members who had completed residency or fellowship training and had experience in the surgical workforce. The survey contained demographic, occupational, and validated microaggression items. Analyses include descriptive and chi-square statistics, t tests, and bivariable and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 377 American College of Surgeons members with the following characteristics: working as a surgeon (80.9%), non-Hispanic White (71.8%), general surgeons (71.0%), aged ≥50 years (67.4%), fellowship-trained (61.0%), and women (58.4%). A total of 254 (67.4%) respondents reported experiencing microaggressions. Younger surgeons (P=.002), women (P<.001), and fellowship-trained surgeons (P=.001) were more likely to report experiencing microaggressions than their counterparts. Surgeons working in academic medical centers or health care systems with teaching responsibilities were more likely to experience microaggressions than those in private practice (P<.01). Surgeons currently working as a surgeon or those who are unable to work reported more experience with microaggressions (P=.003). There was no difference in microaggressions experienced among respondents based on surgical specialty, race/ethnicity, or whether the surgeons reported having a disability. In multivariable logistic regression, women had higher odds of experiencing microaggressions compared with men (adjusted odds ratio, 15.9; 95% confidence interval, 7.7-32.8), and surgeons in private practice had significantly lower odds of experiencing microaggressions compared with surgeons in academic medicine (adjusted odds ratio, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.8) or in health care systems with teaching responsibilities (adjusted odds ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.6). Among surgeons responding to an online survey, respondents reporting microaggressions were less likely to say that they would choose a career in surgery again (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons reporting experience with microaggressions represent a diverse range of surgical specialties and subspecialties. With the continued expansion of surgeon gender and race/ethnicity representation, deliberate efforts to address and eliminate workplace microaggressions could have broad implications for improving recruitment and retention of surgeons.

Gender and Racial Diversity Among Obstetrics and Gynecology Departments and Gynecologic Oncology Divisions in Canada: Are We There Yet?

OBJECTIVES

Gender and racial diversity in academic Canadian departments of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) have not been previously described. We examined gender representation in leadership in academic OBGYN departments and gynecologic oncology (GO) divisions, and determined factors predictive of leadership and promotion including racialized status.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study of Canadian residency-affiliated academic OBGYN departments queried institutional websites in January 2021 to compile a list of academic faculty. Subjective gender was assessed using photographs and pronouns, and racialized status was determined using photographs. Logistic regression analyses determined predictive factors for leadership roles. Fassiotto et al. rank equity indices (REI) and Hofler et al. representation ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

Within 16 Canadian institutions there were 354 (33.6%) men and 699 (66.4%) women, with 18.3% racialized faculty. Men were more likely to reach full professorship (P < 0.00001) and leadership positions of department chair, vice-chair or division head (P = 0.01). Representation ratios for women in OBGYN were <1 for all administrative leadership positions, and pairwise comparisons of the probability of promotion for women OBGYNs using REI reveal significant disparities between senior and junior administrative leadership and professorial ranks. Racialized physicians were less likely to have attained full professorship (P = 0.002). Ninety-seven academic GOs were identified: 68 (70.1%) were women, 17 (17.5%) racialized. Seven GO divisions (44%) had no racialized members. On multivariate analysis, only year of completion of fellowship was predictive of leadership.

CONCLUSION

In academic Canadian OBGYN departments women are underrepresented in leadership and full professor positions. Racialized faculty are underrepresented in full professorship.

Matching Against Men: 5 Years of Residency Match Data Show Disparities Still Exist

OBJECTIVES

Despite progress toward equal representation by sex in medical practice, women remain underrepresented in many specialties. This study sought to examine the current state of gender equality among recently graduated doctors in multiple specialties.

METHODS

Deidentified demographics, standardized examination scores, and Match results were gathered for 829 graduates. Participants were selected from an allopathic medical school between 2016 and 2020. Nineteen students (2.29%) were excluded from the study. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and χ2 tests for independence were used to compare proportions between reported sex and specialty and program Match results. One-way analysis of variance was then performed to test for differences in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores between sexes. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of the 829 individuals studied, 44.6% were women. A significantly smaller proportion of women matched into the most competitive specialties, despite no significant difference in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores between sexes. Furthermore, there was an overall significant trend of women matching into more competitive programs for any given specialty.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we found that men matched into more highly competitive specialties, whereas women matched into more competitive residency program locations. Further research is needed to determine why women matched into specific specialties at lower rates than their male peers and seek to understand how sex affects the narrative of specialty choice.

Pride & prejudice: A scoping review of LGBTQ + medical trainee experiences

PURPOSE

LGBTQ + medical trainees experience significant discrimination. These individuals are stigmatized within a hetero- and cis-normative system, resulting in poorer outcomes in mental health and increased stress regarding career trajectory compared with their hetero- and cis-identifying counterparts. However, literature on the barriers experienced during medical training in this marginalized group is limited to small heterogeneous studies. This scoping review collates and explores prominent themes in existing literature on the personal and professional outcomes of LGBTQ + medical trainees.

METHODS

We searched five library databases (SCOPUS, Ovid-Medline, ERIC, PsycINFO and EMBASE) for studies that investigated LGBTQ + medical trainees' academic, personal, or professional outcomes. Screening and full text review were performed in duplicate, and all authors participated in thematic analysis to determine emerging themes, which were iteratively reviewed to consensus.

RESULTS

From 1809 records, 45 met inclusion criteria (κ = 0.57). Major themes that emerged in the literature included the prevalence of discrimination and mistreatment faced by LGBTQ + medical trainees from colleagues and superiors, concerns regarding disclosure of sexual and/or gender minority identity, and overall negative impacts on mental health including higher rates of depression, substance use, and suicidal ideation. There was a noted lack of inclusivity in medical education and having an LGBTQ + identity had a large impact on career trajectory. Community with peers and mentors was an important determinant of success and belonging. There was a noteworthy lack of research on intersectionality or positive interventions that improved outcomes for this population.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review highlighted important barriers facing LGBTQ + medical trainees, identifying substantial gaps in the existing literature. Research on supportive interventions and predictors of training success is lacking and will be important to foster an inclusive education system. These findings provide critical insights for education leaders and researchers to help create and evaluate inclusive and empowering environments for trainees.

Gender leadership in gynecologic oncology professional societies worldwide

OBJECTIVE

We aim to study gender representation among the different national gynecologic oncology (GO) societies' presidents over the past decade.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study examining the period 2013-2022. The leadership positions in 11 GO societies in the USA (SGO), internationally (IGCS), Europe (ESGO), Australia (ASGO), Israel (ISGO), Japan (JSGO), Asia-Oceania (AOGIN), India (INSGO), Latin America (SLAGO), South Africa (SASGO), and Turkey (TRSGO) was studied. The proportion of leadership positions held by women was calculated and trends were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, the average rate of women's representation during the study period was 26.4%, and for the different organizations was: SASGO 70.0%, SGO 50.0%, ESGO 40.0%, ASGO 30.0%, INSGO 30.0%, and IGCS, ISGO, and SLAGO 20.0% each, TRSGO 10%, and no representation of women in JSGO and AOGIN. There was a significant decrease from 2013 to 2016 (63.6% to 9.1%) (P = 0.009) in women's representation as presidents of societies. From 2017 to 2022, there was no difference in women's representation (ranging from 9.1% to 36.4%) (P = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that women are significantly under-represented in leadership positions in GO professional societies; however, in South Africa and the USA their representation in the last decade was close to equality.

Gender Equity in Academic Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Departments: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study

IMPORTANCE

Gender equity in obstetrics and gynecology remains a barrier to career mobility and workplace satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate gender equity for academic positions in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) divisions with an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional observational study of all FPMRS divisions with an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship program in the United States in July 2020 using publicly available demographic and academic data collected from online search engines. Gender equity in academic FPMRS was assessed by gender representation, academic appointment, and research productivity of each attending physician within the division. Research productivity was assessed using both the H-index with career length controlled for with the M-quotient.

RESULTS

There were 348 attending physicians from 72 FPMRS divisions (198 female [56.9%], 150 male [43.1%]). A large percentage of female attending physicians were at the assistant professor level (75.8% [94 of 124]) when compared with their male counterparts (24.4% [30 of 124]; P < 0.001). Conversely, there were a larger percentage of male attending physicians (62.2% [56 of 90]) at the professor level when compared with their female counterparts (37.8% [34 of 90]; P < 0.001). There was no difference in research productivity between male and female attending physicians after controlling for career length with the M-quotient (P = 0.65). Only age (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.24) and the M-quotient (odds ratio, 36.17, 95% confidence interval, 8.57-152.73) were significantly associated with professorship.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that there are more female attending physicians in FPMRS and that most are assistant professors. Male and female FPMRS attending physicians had similar research productivity with respect to their career lengths. Gender was not a determinant for achieving a "professor" appointment.

Representation of Women and Minority Faculty and Fellows in Academic Pediatric Cardiology Training Programs

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that diverse care teams optimize patient outcomes. Describing the current representation of women and minorities has been a critical step in improving diversity across several fields.

OBJECTIVES

To address the lack of data specific to pediatric cardiology, the authors conducted a national survey.

METHODS

U.S. academic pediatric cardiology programs with fellowship training programs were surveyed. Division directors were invited (July 2021 to September 2021) to complete an e-survey of program composition. Underrepresented minorities in medicine (URMM) were characterized using standard definitions. Descriptive analyses at the hospital, faculty, and fellow level were performed.

RESULTS

Altogether, 52 of 61 programs (85%) completed the survey, representing 1,570 total faculty and 438 fellows, with a wide range in program size (7-109 faculty, 1-32 fellows). Although women comprise approximately 60% of faculty in pediatrics overall, they made up 55% of fellows and 45% of faculty in pediatric cardiology. Representation of women in leadership roles was notably less, including 39% of clinical subspecialty directors, 25% of endowed chairs, and 16% of division directors. URMM comprise approximately 35% of the U.S. population; however, they made up only 14% of pediatric cardiology fellows and 10% of faculty, with very few in leadership roles.

CONCLUSIONS

These national data suggest a "leaky pipeline" for women in pediatric cardiology and very limited presence of URRM overall. Our findings can inform efforts to elucidate underlying mechanisms for persistent disparity and reduce barriers to improving diversity in the field.

Perceptions of Gender Equity by Urologic Subspecialty

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how urologists in various subspecialties view the climate for female urologists, comparing perceptions of gender inequity based on characteristics including gender, subspecialty training, faculty status, parental status, and years in practice. Despite growth in female representation in urology, gender inequalities in career opportunities and compensation continue to exist.

METHODS

An IRB approved survey was sent out to the following list-serves: Society of Urological Oncology (SUO), Society of Endourology (ENDO), Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons (GURS), Society of Pediatric Urology (SPU), Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU), and American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS). A validated study, the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success (CCWAS) was used, and scores analyzed using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum and Kruskal-Wallace tests.

RESULTS

There were 430 survey responses (35.3% female, 64.7% male). There was a statistically significant difference in CCWAS score for gender, parental status, and society. On multiple regression analysis controlling for gender, parental status and society were not statistically significant. Years in practice and practice type were not significant. Male urologists perceived practice culture toward women as more equitable than their female colleagues, (median [interquartile range] CCWAS score, 203.5 [184.25, 225.0] vs 162.5 [130.75, 188.0]; P < .0001). This discrepancy in perception between genders was consistent across all subcategories; equal access, work-life balance, freedom of gender bias, and leadership support.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that there are gender-based differences in how gender inequities are perceived and experienced in urology. Acknowledgment of these differences is the first step in identifying opportunities for improvement.

Gender-related differences in career development among gynecologic oncology surgeons in Europe. European Network of Young Gynecologic Oncologists' Survey based data

Introduction

Gender-related differences in career development are well known issues in various professions. An international survey on gender-related differences was performed among young gynecologic oncology surgeons in Europe to identify potential gender inequalities in career development.

Material and methods

A survey on demographics, clinical and academic working environment, family/parenting, career development, salary and leadership was sent to all members of the European Network of Young Gynecologic Oncologists (ENYGO), which is a network within the European Society of Gynecologic Oncology (ESGO). Gynecologic oncology surgeons and obstetricians/gynecologists who actively work in this field in Europe were included in the study.

Results

Responses were analyzed from 192 gynecologic oncology surgeons of whom 65.1% (125/192) were female (median age 37, IQR: 34 - 42) and 34.9% (67/192) were male (median age 38, IQR: 36 - 41). Male reported to perform a median of 15 and female a median of 10 operations per month (p = .007). Among female, 24.8% had a leadership position vs. 44.8% among male, crude OR = 2.46, 95% CI 1.31-4.62, p<.01. When stratifying for age under 41 and having children, 36.7% of male and 5.6% of female had a leadership position, adjusted OR 10.8, 95% CI 3.28-35.64, p<.001. A significantly higher proportion of female compared to male believed they earned less than their gender counterparts at the same clinical position and with same qualifications (30.4% vs. 2.5%, p<.001). There was not a statistically significant gender difference in the academic qualification PhD degree or professorship (p = .92 and p = .64, respectively). In the previous year, male published more peer-reviewed articles than female (median 3 vs. median 2; p = .017).

Conclusion

This first comprehensive survey on gender-differences in gynecologic oncology in Europe revealed that there are gender gaps concerning several aspects during the critical time of career development in the young generation of gynecologic oncology surgeons. These gender gaps are particularly reflected by a lower rate of female leadership positions. ENYGO and ESGO are dedicated to work on solution to overcome the identified obstacles and to support closing gender gaps.

Sexual Harassment Prevalence Among OBGYN Trainees and Cultural Climate of their Training Programs: Result From a Nationwide Survey

OBJECTIVE

Sexual harassment has many short- and long-term consequences and greatly impacts the clinical work environment, job satisfaction, job performance, and mental wellbeing of the individual. Data on prevalence of sexual harassment in a women-majority field such as Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) are limited. This national cross-sectional study sought to determine the prevalence of sexual harassment among OBGYN trainees in the United States (U.S.) and assess the associated departmental cultural climate.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

This study was a cross-sectional, anonymous, voluntary, national survey of OBGYN residents and fellows in the U.S. conducted from May 1, 2019 to June 30, 2019. The validated Sexual Experience Questionnaire was administered via an online survey. Trainees were also queried regarding wellbeing, work satisfaction, and departmental/institutional reporting structure. Demographic data were also gathered. The main outcome was prevalence of sexual harassment among U.S. OBGYN trainees.

RESULTS

An email including the survey link was distributed to 1473 OBGYN trainees from 60 programs; 366 completed it (24.8% response rate). The mean age of survey respondents was 30.5 (SD 2.9) years. The majority of respondents were women (86%), White (64.1%), and residents (PGY 1-4, 80.2%). The prevalence of sexual harassment among respondents was 69.1% (69.6% of men and 68.7% of women). The prevalence of sexual harassment by race/ethnicity was: Hispanic/Latina 75.0%, White 68.7%, Asian 68.6%, and Black 47.4% trainees. The majority of respondents' program directors were women (66.4%, 227/342) and the majority of department chairs were men (68.9%, 235/341). The prevalence of sexual harassment did not differ based on the gender of the respondents' program directors and chairs (p-value 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high prevalence of sexual harassment among U.S. OBGYN trainees. Action is required to improve institutional and departmental cultures.

Sex and Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Accredited Obstetrics and Gynecology Specialty and Subspecialty Training in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To compare trends in racial and gender diversity in Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) residency and fellowship programs from beginning of program accreditation in 2012 to the most recently published report for 2018.

DESIGN

Data was abstracted in August 2020 from publicly available reports on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website. Reports from 2012 to 2018 were compared with Chi-square tests and the Cochran-Armitage trend test assessed trends over time.

PARTICIPANTS

U.S. medical residents and fellows, with a focus on those in accredited OBGYN fellowship programs (Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS), Gynecologic Oncology (GYNONC), Maternal Fetal Medicine (MFM), and Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI)).

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018 men in all residency programs increased 0.88% (from 53.92% male to 54.80%, p < 0.0001). Across all years there were less men in OBGYN (16.89%) compared to all residency programs (54.39%, p < 0.0001). All OBGYN fellowships combined had more men proportionately than OBGYN residencies (24.14% vs. 16.89%, p < 0.0001). MFM had the most men (26.7%) then GYNONC (25.18%), FPMRS (21.36%), and REI (20.09%) (p = 0.024). There were no statistically significant trends in sex or race over time. From 2012 to 2018 residents overall were 42.96% white. OBGYN residents overall were 54.20% white. GYNONC had the highest percentage of white trainees (73.45%), followed by MFM (67.8%), REI (65.62%), then FPMRS (60%) (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

According to ACGME core competencies, residents are expected to demonstrate sensitivity and responsiveness to diverse patient populations (professionalism) and advocate for improvements to systems-based practice. These results may suggest systemic issues in the recruitment of women and people of color into competitive sub-specialty programs. Such deficiencies in representation can impact patient care. Future research is needed to assess trends over time as data become available and to evaluate specific barriers to applications and selection of minority applicants.

Gynecologic Oncology and Inclusion of Women Into the Surgical Workforce: The Canary in This Coal Mine

Objective

Women make up a majority of the gynecologic oncology workforce. Increasing the numbers of women in leadership has been proposed as a path towards professional gender equity. This study examined whether leadership gender and departmental infrastructure impact the work environment for women gynecologic oncologists.

Methods

Members of a 472-member private Facebook group “Women of Gynecologic Oncology” (WGO) who self-identified as women gynecologic oncologists provided demographics, practice infrastructure, personal experience with workplace bullying, gender discrimination, microaggressions using a REDcap survey platform.

Results

Of 250 (53%) respondents to this survey, most were younger than age 50 years (93.6%); White (82.2%) and non-Hispanic (94.3%); married (84.7%); and parenting (75.2%). Practice environments included academic (n=152, 61.0%), hospital employed (n=57, 22.9%), and private practice (n=31, 12.4%), and 89.9% supervised trainees. A significant percent of respondents had experienced bullying (52.8%), gender discrimination (57%) and microaggressions (83%). Age, race, ethnicity, practice setting, or mentorship were not statistically significantly associated with these experiences. Reported perpetrators were varied and included colleagues (84%), patients (44%), staff (41%), administrators (18%), and trainees (16%). Prevalence of bullying (55.0 vs 47.7%, p=0.33), gender discrimination (59.1 vs 52.3%, p=0.33) and microaggressions (83.3 vs 83.0%, p=1.00) were similar irrespective of departmental leadership gender.

Conclusions

Women gynecologic oncologists report a high prevalence of workplace bullying, gender discrimination and microaggressions regardless of the gender of their immediate leadership. Proactive and deliberate structural interventions to improve the work environment for surgeons who are women are urgently needed.

Predoctoral MD-PhD grants as indicators of future NIH funding success

MD-PhD trainees constitute an important source of physician-scientists. Persistence on this challenging path is facilitated by success in garnering independent (R grant) support from the NIH. Published research tracks academic appointments and global R01 success for MD-PhD trainees but has not included information on future funding success of individual MD-PhD predoctoral grant holders. Here, we used data from the NIH RePORTER database to identify and track the funding trajectory of physician-scientists who received predoctoral grant support through the F30 mechanism, which is specific for dual-degree candidates. Male and female F30 awardees did not differ in their success in garnering K (postdoctoral training) grants, but, among F30 grant awardees, men were 2.6 times more likely than women to receive R funding. These results underscore the need for analysis of factors that contribute to the disproportionate loss of NIH-supported female physician-scientists between the predoctoral F30 and the independent R grant-supported stages.

Discrimination Towards Women in Surgery: A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Over the past twenty years explicit gender bias towards women in surgery has been replaced by more subtle barriers, which represent indirect forms of discrimination and prevents equality.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our scoping review is to summarize the different forms of discrimination towards women in surgery.

METHODS

The database search consisted of original studies regarding discrimination towards female surgeons.

RESULTS

Of 3,615 studies meeting research criteria, 63 were included. Of these articles, 11 (18%) were focused on gender-based discrimination, 14 (22%) on discrimination in authorship, research productivity and research funding, 21 (33%) on discrimination in academic surgery, 7 (11%) on discrimination in surgical leadership positions and 10 (16%) on discrimination during conferences and in surgical societies. The majority (n = 53, 84%) of the included studies were conducted in the U.S.A. According to our analysis, female surgeons experience discrimination from male colleagues, healthcare workers, but also from patients and trainees. Possible solutions may include acknowledgement of the problem, increased education of diversity and integration for the younger generations, mentorship, coaching and more active engagement by male and female partners to support women in the surgical field.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender-based discrimination toward women in the field of surgery has evolved over the past twenty years, from an explicit to a more subtle attitude. A work-environment where diversity and flexibility are valued would allow female surgeons to better realize their full potential.

Creating work environments where people of all genders in gynecologic oncology can thrive: An SGO evidence-based review

Equality, equity, and parity in the workplace are necessary to optimize patient care across all aspects of medicine. Gender-based inequities remain an obstacle to quality of care, including within the now majority women subspecialty of gynecologic oncology. The results of the 2020 SGO State of the Society Survey prompted this evidence-based review. Evidence related to relevant aspects of the clinical care model by which women with malignancies are cared for is summarized. Recommendations are made that include ways to create work environments where all members of a gynecologic oncology clinical care team, regardless of gender, can thrive. These recommendations aim to improve equality and equity within the specialty and, in doing so, elevate the care that our patients receive.

Occupational risks to pregnant obstetrics and gynaecology trainees and physicians: Is it time to think about this?

The proportion of women in the workforce has been steadily increasing worldwide. Women now constitute approximately 75% of the global health workforce and almost 90% in nursing and midwifery professions. The present times have witnessed a dramatic gender shift in the speciality of obstetrics and gynaecology. Women now comprise a significant proportion of practicing obstetrics and gynaecology specialists all over the world. In 2018, more than 80% of resident doctors and nearly 60% of physicians in the speciality were female, far exceeding any other surgical speciality. Most resident doctors and a significant proportion of practising physicians in obstetrics and gynaecology are in the reproductive age group. They will become pregnant at some point in their training program or career. The present review focuses on all work-related exposure risks for pregnant obstetrics and gynaecology professionals. It discusses the risks of infectious diseases, radiation, stress, violence against doctors, and even peer support (or lack of it) that can have deleterious effects on the health of pregnant physicians and the health of their unborn foetuses.

Sex Differences in Commercial Patient Reviews of Women and Men Urogynecologic Surgeons

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to describe differences in commercial patient reviews of women and men urogynecologic surgeons.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reviews of surgeons on Healthgrades.com in 4 metropolitan areas were included. Based on the qualitative assessment using qualitative content analysis of major and minor elements, we defined 4 theme categories: global experience, social interaction, technical skills, and ancillary aspects, each embedded with discrete elements. Differences in proportions of mentioned themes as well as quantitative ratings were evaluated by sex with the appropriate statistical tests.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-four patient reviews (51% for women surgeons and 49% for men surgeons) were identified for 141 gynecologic surgeons self-identifying as "urogynecologists." The majority of the cohort (77%) held subspecialty certification in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery. Reviews of women demonstrated a lower mean quantitative "likelihood to recommend" score compared with men (4.0 vs 4.3, P = 0.002) on the 5-point scale. Women received more mention in comfort (52% vs 40%, P = 0.023) and professionalism (19% vs 9%, P = 0.007) themes and less mention with respect to surgical outcomes (28% vs 53%, P < 0.001) and technical skills (5% vs 15%, P = 0.011) compared with men.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercial online patient reviews for urogynecologic surgeons reveal sex bias with women receiving lower scores overall and more comments related to social interaction and fewer comments related to surgical outcomes and technical skill compared with men.

Women Representation in Surgical Specialties: Reflections about Gender Equity after the 34th Brazilian Surgical Conference

In September 2021, the 34th Brazilian Surgical Conference hosted the "Panel: Women in Surgery" - the only session in the event solely composed of female speakers. Although gender inequities in surgery are well recognized in the international literature, the panel portrayed how distant we are from the desired equity in our country. In addition, the session emphasized the need to broaden the debate and identify the mechanisms for greater inclusion and maintenance of women in the surgical career. In this editorial, we provide a historical overview of gender disparities in the Brazilian surgical ecosystem, highlight the contributing factors to a reduced number of female surgeons, and how the structure of medical societies may influence the rise of women to leadership positions. Accordingly, we discuss the benefits of gender diversity for surgeons, patients, and institutions. Furthermore, we analyze the representation of women in the Brazilian College of Surgeons since its foundation and in the scientific sessions at the conference, demonstrating that more initiatives are required to encourage female representation in the college. Finally, we propose a series of recommendations to foster engagement and contribute to the prosperity of women surgeons in Brazil.

Promotion of gender equity in obstetrics and gynecology: principles and practices for academic leaders

The advancement of women leaders in obstetrics and gynecology does not reflect the changes in the physician workforce seen over the last 50 years. A core value of our culture in obstetrics and gynecology must be gender equity. Departmental, institutional, and professional society efforts should explicitly prioritize and demonstrate a commitment to gender equity with tangible actions. This commentary from the American Gynecological and Obstetrical Society synthesizes available information about women holding academic leadership roles within obstetrics and gynecology. We propose specific principles and leadership practices to promote gender equity.

More than grit: growing and sustaining physician-scientists in obstetrics and gynecology

Obstetricians know the statistics-1 out of every 10 babies is born premature; preeclampsia affects 1 in 25 pregnant people; the United States has the highest rate of maternal mortality in the developed world. Yet, physicians and scientists still do not fully understand the biology of normal pregnancy, let alone what causes these complications. Obstetrics and gynecology-trained physician-scientists are uniquely positioned to fill critical knowledge gaps by addressing clinically-relevant problems through fundamental research and interpreting insights from basic and translational studies in the clinical context. Within our specialty, however, physician-scientists are relatively uncommon. Inadequate guidance, lack of support and community, and structural barriers deter fellows and early stage faculty from pursuing the physician-scientist track. One approach to help cultivate the next generation of physician-scientists in obstetrics and gynecology is to demystify the process and address the common barriers that contribute to the attrition of early stage investigators. Here, we review major challenges and propose potential pathways forward in the areas of mentorship, obtaining protected research time and resources, and ensuring diversity, equity, and inclusion, from our perspective as early stage investigators in maternal-fetal medicine. We discuss the roles of early stage investigators and leaders at the institutional and national level in the collective effort to retain and grow our physician-scientist workforce. We aim to provide a framework for early stage investigators initiating their research careers and a starting point for discussion with academic stakeholders. We cannot afford to lose the valuable contributions of talented individuals due to modifiable factors or forfeit our voices as advocates for the issues that impact pregnant populations.

Professional Address during Obstetrics and Gynecology Grand Rounds Introductions: Setting the Stage, Setting the Standard

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess gender dynamics during Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn) Grand Rounds.

DESIGN

This was an observational cohort study of Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introductions at a large academic center. Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introductions from December 2016 to February 2020 were included. Audio and video components of introductions for those with doctorate degrees were reviewed. Each named reference to the presenter and use of descriptors were collected. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables.

SETTING

This study was completed at the University of Wisconsin in the Department of Ob/Gyn PARTICIPANTS: Ob/Gyn Grand Rounds introducers who had complete audio and video components of introductions for those with doctorate degrees.

RESULTS

Sixty-four Grand Rounds introductions were reviewed; 57 met inclusion criteria. The majority of introducers and presenters were women. Consistent use of "doctor" was similar by men and women introducers (50% vs. 29%, p = 0.427). Assistant professors were more likely to maintain professional address during introductions, compared to associate or full professors (86% vs. 0% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). Trainees were less likely than faculty to be addressed professionally at any time during introductions (42% vs. 81%, p = 0.017). Descriptors were used for men and women presenters, though men received more female-gendered descriptors than women (5 vs. 1, p = 0.011). Women introducers used productivity descriptors less often than men introducers (8 [15.1%] vs. 5 [55.6%] (p = 0.015)).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of professional address was associated with academic rank, but not gender. Men endorsed and received more descriptors emphasizing accomplishments, highlighting qualifications as an expert. Given the professional environment, all Grand Rounds presenters should be introduced using professional titles.

Double Discrimination, the Pay Gap in Gynecologic Surgery, and Its Association With Quality of Care

In this commentary, we describe historical and other influences that drive "double discrimination" in gynecologic surgery-lower pay in the area of surgery that boasts the largest proportion of female surgeons and is focused on female patients and explore how it results in potentially lower quality care. Insurers reimburse procedures for women at a lower rate than similar procedures for men, although there is no medically justifiable reason for this disparity. The wage gap created by lower reimbursement rates disproportionately affects female surgeons, who are disproportionately represented among gynecologic surgeons. This contributes to a large wage gap in surgery for women. Finally, poor reimbursement for gynecologic surgery pushes many obstetrics and gynecology surgeons to preferentially perform obstetric services, resulting in a high prevalence of low-volume gynecologic surgeons, a metric that is closely tied to higher complication rates. Creating equity in reimbursement for gynecologic surgery is one important and ethically required step forward to gender equity in medicine for patients and surgeons.

Does Chair of Surgery Gender Influence Divisional or Residency Program Director Gender Diversity?

BACKGROUND

Workplace diversity is beneficial and results in new ideas and improved performance. Within surgery leadership, the gender gap is improving, but still present. Given the increasing number of women surgery department chairs, we aimed to examine the association of surgery chair gender with division and residency program director gender. We hypothesized that surgery departments with female leadership would have an increase in gender diversity compared to departments led by male chairs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A list of all surgery departments were compiled from the Society of Surgical Chairs website. Gender of department chair, division director and residency program director were examined and compared. Chair position term length was determined based on online public announcements, publicly available curriculum vitae, and institutional profile biographies.

RESULTS

Of 178 department chairs included, 10.7% were female, and 89.3% were male. There was no difference in female residency program director leadership between female versus male led programs (42.1 versus 26.1%, P= 0.147). Of the programs with female department chairs, only 29.4% had any female division directors compared to 54.6% led by male chairs (P= 0.055). When examining departments with ≥5 division directors, there was no difference in the average number of female division directors within departments led by female versus male chairs. There was a significant difference in length of surgery chairship, with female chairs holding the position for fewer years than male chairs (median time 5.3 (IQR = 3.4-5.8) versus 7.0 (IQR=4.3-12.3) years, P= 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Female department chair leadership was not associated with increased diversity in divisional leadership compared to departments of surgery led by males.

Women are underrepresented in major US sleep societies recognition awards

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To investigate gender distribution of US sleep professionals who received major recognition awards over a forty-year period from the two national sleep societies: the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) and the Sleep Research Society (SRS).

METHODS

We reviewed and analyzed the publicly available lists of sleep recognition awards recipients from the AASM and the SRS websites. The primary outcome measures were the overall proportion of individual sleep recognition awards given to US men and women sleep professionals and the trend over time (1981-2020) analyzed by decade using the Cochran-Armitage test.

RESULTS

Seven major sleep recognition awards (four by the AASM; three by the SRS) were identified over 40 years. There were overall 164 individual sleep recognition awards presented by the two sleep societies to US sleep professionals, including 136 (82.9%) awarded for men and only 28 (17.1%) awarded for women. The analysis of the sleep recognition awards over time by decade revealed a significant increasing trend (p < 0.0001) in the proportion of awards recognizing women relative to men with a progression from 0.0% in the 1980s, to 3.4% in the 1990s, to 13.1% in the 2000s, and to 31.7% in the 2010s.

CONCLUSIONS

US women sleep professionals were historically underrepresented in major sleep recognition awards, with a reduction in the gender gap in the last ten years. The reasons behind gender inequality in sleep recognition awards remain unclear and deserve further investigation.