Female Physicians Are Underrepresented in Recognition Awards from the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Disparities in funding for Nobel Prize awards in medicine and physiology across nationalities, races, and gender

Since 1901, the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine has been awarded to numerous individuals for their outstanding contributions. This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the Nobel Prize recipients, focusing on gender, race, and nationality. We observe that an alarming disparity emerges when we examine the underrepresentation of Black scientists among Nobel laureates. Furthermore, trends in nationalities show how Americans make up the majority of Nobel Prize winners, while there is a noticeable lack of gender and racial minority winners of the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine. Together, this highlights the importance of diversity and inclusion in scientific achievement. We offer suggestions and techniques, including funding opportunities and expanding nominators, to improve the gender, racial, and geographical diversity of Nobel Prizes.

"Best Paper" awards lack transparency, inclusivity, and support for Open Science

Awards can propel academic careers. They also reflect the culture and values of the scientific community. But do awards incentivize greater transparency, inclusivity, and openness in science? Our cross-disciplinary survey of 222 awards for the "best" journal articles across all 27 SCImago subject areas revealed that journals and learned societies administering such awards generally publish little detail on their procedures and criteria. Award descriptions were brief, rarely including contact details or information on the nominations pool. Nominations of underrepresented groups were not explicitly encouraged, and concepts that align with Open Science were almost absent from the assessment criteria. At the same time, 10% of awards, especially the recently established ones, tended to use article-level impact metrics. USA-affiliated researchers dominated the winner's pool (48%), while researchers from the Global South were uncommon (11%). Sixty-one percent of individual winners were men. Overall, Best Paper awards miss the global calls for greater transparency and equitable access to academic recognition. We provide concrete and implementable recommendations for scientific awards to improve the scientific recognition system and incentives for better scientific practice.

Trends in Gender Authorship of Abstract Presentations at Plastic Surgery the Meeting: A Decade Long Analysis

ABSTRACT

Current literature fails to examine gender differences of authors presenting abstracts at national plastic surgery meetings. This study aims to assess the ratio of female to male abstract presentations at Plastic Surgery The Meeting (PSTM).The gender of all abstract presenters from PSTM between 2010 and 2020 was recorded. The primary outcome variable was authorship (first, second, or last). Trends in gender authorship were assessed via Cochran-Armitage trend tests. Chi-square was utilized to evaluate the association between author gender and presentation type and author gender and subspecialty.Between 2010 and 2020, 3653 abstracts were presented (oral = 3035, 83.1%; poster = 618, 16.9%) with 19,328 (5175 females, 26.8%) authors. Of these, 34.5%, 32.0%, and 18.6% of first, second, and last authors were female, respectively. The total proportion of female authors increased from 153 (20.4%) in 2010 to 1065 (33.1%) by 2020. The proportion of female first, second, and last authors increased from 21.8% to 44.8%, 24.0% to 45.3%, and 14.3% to 22.1%, respectively, and demonstrated a positive linear trend ( P < 0.001 ). The proportion of female first authors in aesthetics (23.9%) was lower than that for breast (41.8%), cranio/maxillofacial/head & neck (38.5%), practice management (43.3%), and research/technology (39.4%) ( P < 0.001 ).Our study demonstrates a significant increase in female representation as first, second, and last authors in abstract presentations at PSTM within the last decade, although the absolute prevalence remains low.

Systematic Review of Women Leading and Participating in Nephrology Randomized Clinical Trials

Introduction

Women are underrepresented in the leadership of and participation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a bibliometric review of nephrology RCTs to examine trial leadership by women and participation of women in nephrology RCTs.

Methods

A bibliometric review of RCTs published in top medical, surgical, or nephrology journals was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 2011 to December 2021. Leadership by women as corresponding authors, women trial participation, and trial characteristics were examined with duplicate independent data extraction. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between trial characteristics and women leadership and trial participation.

Results

A total of 1770 studies were screened and 395 RCTs met eligibility criteria. The number (%) of women in corresponding, first, and last authorship positions were as follows: 89 (22%), 109 (28%), and 74 (19%), respectively, without change over time (P = 0.94). The median percentage (interquartile range [IQR]) of women trial participants was 39.0% (13.5%) with no difference between women or men lead authors (P = 0.15). Men lead authors were statistically less likely to enroll women in RCTs. Women lead authors were less likely to be funded by industry (odds ratio [OR]: 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14-0.63; P = 0.002) or lead international trials (OR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.01-0.83; P = 0.03). Trials with sex-specific eligibility criteria were more likely to have women leaders (OR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.19-5.49; P = 0.02) than those without.

Discussion

Gender inequalities in RCT leadership and RCT participation exist in nephrology and did not improve over time. Strategies to improve inequalities need to be implemented and evaluated.

Recognizing Excellence in Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Epidemiology: The National MCH Epidemiology Awards

Purpose

Professionals in the field of maternal and child health (MCH) epidemiology are publicly recognized by the Coalition for Excellence in MCH Epidemiology representing 16 national MCH agencies and organizations.

Description

During the CityMatCH Leadership and MCH Epidemiology Conference, the national awards are presented to public health professionals for improving the health of women, children, and families. The awards have evolved over the last two decades with focus on awardees that represent more types of MCH public health professionals.

Assessment

Since 2000, the Coalition has presented 111 national awards in the areas of advancing knowledge, effective practice, outstanding leadership, excellence in teaching and mentoring, early career professional achievement, and lifetime achievement. Effective practice awards were most often presented at 45 awards, followed by early career professional achievement with 20. The awardees varied by place of employment with 37 employed at academic institutions, 33 in federal government positions, 32 in state or county government, seven in non-profit and two in clinical organizations. Awards were almost equally distributed by gender with 49 presented to women and 48 to men. Assessment of career advancement among previous awardees and acknowledging workforce challenges are gaps identified within the national awards process.

Conclusion

Recognition of deserving MCH professionals sets the standard for those entering the field of MCH epidemiology and offers opportunity to recognize those who have built capacity and improved the health of women, children, and families.

[Awards in pathology-a man's world?]

BACKGROUND

Awards provide their recipients with fame and recognition, and subsequently facilitate publications and acquisition of external funding through increased visibility. We hypothesize that despite increasing representation in pathology, women are underrepresented as awardees in the German Society of Pathology and consequently there is an associated imbalance between genders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Published data from the German Society of Pathology on female awardees during the period from 2000 to 2022 were examined. Only awards specifically dedicated to the field of pathology were considered. In addition, the publicly available data of the German Medical Association on gender and age distribution of pathologists in Germany were considered as reference material.

RESULTS

A total of six different awards were included in the analysis. Among the 143 awardees across 150 individual awards in the period from 2000 to 2022, 55 (38.4%) of the awardees were female compared to an average percentage of 31% of women working in the field of pathology in the 23-year period under consideration. Consequently, female awardees in pathology were not underrepresented when compared to the national figures on the proportion of women in the field of pathology. However, the distribution of female awardees across individual awards suggests that women were increasingly represented in less prestigious research and doctoral awards, while men made up a large proportion of awardees of honorary awards (0% women) and prestigious awards (17% women).

Trends in gender, race, and ethnic diversity among prospective physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians

BACKGROUND

As the proportion of women and individuals who are underrepresented in medicine slowly rises, disparities persist in numerous arenas and specialties. In physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R), there is a continued need to focus on diversity among trainees. This study aims to evaluate diversity among PM&R applicants and residents over the past 6 years.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the demographic trends in PM&R over the last 6 years and compare those findings with trends in other specialties.

DESIGN

Surveillance.

SETTING

Analyses of national databases from self-reported questionnaires.

PARTICIPANTS

The study consists of 126,833 medical school matriculants, 374,185 resident applicants, and 326,134 resident trainees over the last 6 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-reported demographic data from the Association of American Medical Colleges and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education were analyzed for medical school matriculants, PM&R applicants, and current residents for the cycles of 2014-2015 to 2019-2020. The data were then comparatively reviewed between PM&R and other medical specialties.

RESULTS

In the 6 cycles evaluated, women accounted for 36%-39% of PM&R residents, but 47%-48% in non-PM&R specialties. Women applicants to the PM&R specialty averaged 34.4% over the 6 years analyzed, which was the fourth lowest of the 11 specialties examined. Black or African American and Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin populations each accounted for only 6% of PM&R residents. PM&R demonstrated a noticeably higher proportion of White (62.1% vs. 60.3%) and an observably lower proportion of Black or African American (6.0% vs. 7.1%) and Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin (6.3% vs. 7.9%) residents compared with non-PM&R specialties.

CONCLUSION

There is underrepresentation of women and multiple racial and ethnic minority groups in the field of PM&R from applicants to trainees demonstrating a need to improve recruitment efforts.

Gender Differences in Academic Rank, Leadership, and Awards Among NIH Grant Recipients in Diagnostic Radiology

Objective: Females have been traditionally underrepresented in academia across multiple medical specialties, including radiology. The present study investigated primary investigators (PIs) who received National Institutes of Health (NIH) radiology funding between 2016 and 2019 to establish if there was a correlation between NIH grants, gender, academic rank, first and second tier leadership positions, geographic location, and professional awards. Materials and Methods: Funding information was obtained from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditure and Results (RePORTER) website for 2016-2019. Information for each PI was obtained from academic institutional websites, LinkedIn, and Doximity. Mann-Whitney U tests and chi-square analyses were performed to compare and determine associations between gender and the stated variables of interest. Results: Of the 805 radiology PIs included in this study, 78% were male. There was a significant association of gender with the attainment of the highest academic rank (p = 0.026), with females occupied more of the assistant professor ranks (M:F = 1:1.5) and less of the professor ranks (F:M = 1:1.2). Between genders, there was no significant difference in first and second tier leadership positions (p = 0.497, p = 0.116), and postgraduate honors and awards (p = 0.149). The greatest proportion of grants was awarded in the setting of sole male PIs (55%) and the least proportion of grants were awarded when the contact PI and other project leader were female (1%). Conclusion: Despite having similar academic credentials, including number of leadership positions and postgraduate honors and awards, female radiology PIs who have received NIH grants continue to be underrepresented in higher academic ranks.

Analysis of physician recipients of recognition awards from the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation by Race and Ethnicity

BACKGROUND

Medical society recognition awards are important resources for physicians in advancing their careers. There is a need to better understand the representation of physician recipients by race and ethnicity, especially in women with intersectional identities.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the proportions of American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R) award recipients by race and ethnicity and the intersection of gender.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional and retrospective study.

SETTING AND METHODS

One hundred seven (n = 107) published online physician award recipients from 2011 to 2020 were categorized by race, ethnicity, and gender by two independent researchers. There was 100% interrater agreement on race and gender and 95% on ethnicity. Data were analyzed with descriptive analysis and multilinear regression.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Awards given to physicians coded by race (White/Caucasian, Asian, and Black/African American), ethnicity (Hispanic/Latino), and the intersection of gender with race and ethnicity were analyzed. The primary comparator was proportions by race, ethnicity, and gender of academic physicians in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) using Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) data. A secondary aim was recipients' proportions compared to AAMC benchmarks for all practicing physiatrists.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in representation of award recipients by race or ethnicity compared to the primary comparator of their percentages in academic PM&R. Notably, 96.3% of awards were given to physicians identified as being in or having been in academic medicine. Secondary analysis of award recipients to all practicing physiatrists revealed significant underrepresentation of recipients who were coded as (1) White/Caucasian women, Asian men and women, Black/African American men and women (p = .016), and (2) Hispanic/Latino men and women (p = .028).

CONCLUSIONS

This is a novel study assessing race and ethnicity in physician recognition awards presented by a medical society. No significant disparities were found among recipients as compared to representation in academic PM&R. However, there were significant disparities when compared to all practicing physiatrists. These findings deserve further investigation and consideration as medical societies strive to equitably support all members.

Recognition Awards in Pathology Specialty Societies

OBJECTIVES

Recognition awards build physician reputation and facilitate career advancement. We hypothesize women physicians are underrepresented as award recipients by pathology medical societies compared with representation in the specialty.

METHODS

We analyzed publicly available online information about physician recipients (January 2015 to December 2021) from three general pathology society websites. Recipient gender was determined by pronoun use, first name, and photograph. Representation was compared with Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) specialty data from 2015 and 2019, which showed a minimum of 36.7% women pathologists in 2015 and up to 43.4% in 2019.

RESULTS

Twenty-six awards and 230 physician recipients were included in the analysis. A total of 159 (69.1%) men physicians and 71 (30.9%) women physicians received awards. Overall, women physicians were underrepresented in recognition awards compared with AAMC benchmarks. Prestigious awards (defined as those that recognize a person's body of work over time) showed a similar disparity with 22 (30.1%) of 73 recipients being women. Men physicians were more likely to receive multiple awards.

CONCLUSIONS

Women physicians are underrepresented overall for recognition awards by pathology medical societies. Disparities are greater for prestigious awards. Further research is needed to better understand the reasons for these findings and how they affect women physicians' careers.

Women Physicians in Transition Learning to Navigate the Pipeline from Early to Mid-Career: Protocol for a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Women physicians face unique obstacles while progressing through their careers, navigating career advancement and seeking balance between professional and personal responsibilities. Systemic changes, along with individual and institutional changes, are needed to overcome obstacles perpetuating physician gender inequities. Developing a deeper understanding of women physicians' experiences during important transition points could reveal both barriers and opportunities for recruitment, retention, and promotion, and inform best practices developed based on these experiences.

OBJECTIVE

The aim is to learn from the experiences and perspectives of women physicians as they transition from early to mid-career, then develop best practices that can serve to support women physicians as they advance through their careers.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with women physicians in the United States in 2020 and 2021. Eligibility criteria included self-identification as a woman who is in the process of transitioning or who recently transitioned from early to mid-career stage. Purposeful sampling facilitated identification of participants who represented diversity in career pathway, practice setting, specialty, and race/ethnicity. Each participant was offered compensation for their participation. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. Interview questions were open-ended, exploring participants' perceptions of this transition. Qualitative thematic analysis will be performed. We will use an open coding and grounded theory approach on interview transcripts.

RESULTS

The Ethics Review Committee of the Faculty of Health, Medicine, and Life Sciences at Maastricht University approved the study; Stanford University expedited review approved the study; and the University of California, San Diego certified the study as exempt from review. Twelve in-depth interviews of 50-100 minutes in duration were completed. Preliminary analyses indicate one key theme is a tension resulting from finite time divided between demands from a physician career and demands from family needs. In turn, this results in constant boundary control between these life domains that are inextricable and seemingly competing against each other within a finite space; family needs impinge on planned career goals, if the boundary between them is not carefully managed. To remedy this, women sought resources to help them redistribute home responsibilities, freeing themselves to have more time, especially for children. Women similarly sought resources to help with career advancement, although not with regard to time directly, but to first address foundational knowledge gaps about career milestones and how to achieve them.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary results provide initial insights about how women identify or activate a career shift and how they marshaled resources and support to navigate barriers they faced. Further analyses are continuing as of March 2022 and are expected to be completed by June 2022. The dissemination plan includes peer-reviewed open-access journal publication of the results and presentation at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association's Women Physicians Section.

Enhancing Diversity in Surgery: Association of Out Surgeons and Allies, a New Society to Support and Promote Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Prejudice towards Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) people continues to decline. Despite this, LGBTQ surgeons still experience discrimination from colleagues, staff, and patients at an alarming rate. The Association of Out Surgeons and Allies (AOSA) was established to address this issue by fostering a more equitable and inclusive surgical environment.

AOSA

AOSA is a national surgical organization of LGBTQ students, trainees, faculty, and allies committed to enhancing equity in surgery through education, outreach, mentorship, and sponsorship. AOSA works in collaboration with national efforts and institutional initiatives to promote the inclusion and acceptance of LGBTQ surgeons.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Achieving these goals will require a community effort of LGBTQ surgeons and allies in addition to the support of prominent academic institutions and national surgical organizations.

CONCLUSION

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer surgeons continue to face workplace discrimination. This new surgical society will help foster a supportive environment through visibility, mentorship, education, and community.

Moving beyond ‘think leadership, think white male’: the contents and contexts of equity, diversity and inclusion in physician leadership programmes

The lack of both women and physicians from groups under-represented in medicine (UIM) in leadership has become a growing concern in healthcare. Despite increasing recognition that diversity in physician leadership can lead to reduced health disparities, improved population health and increased innovation and creativity in organisations, progress toward this goal is slow. One strategy for increasing the number of women and UIM physician leaders has been to create professional development opportunities that include leadership training on equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI). However, the extent to which these concepts are explored in physician leadership programming is not known. It is also not clear whether this EDI content challenges structural barriers that perpetuate the status quo of white male leadership. To explore these issues, we conducted an environmental scan by adapting Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology to centre on three questions: How is EDI currently presented in physician leadership programming? How have these programmes been evaluated in the peer-reviewed literature? How is EDI presented and discussed by the wider medical community? We scanned institutional websites for physician leadership programmes, analysed peer-reviewed literature and examined material from medical education conferences. Our findings indicate that despite an apparent increase in the discussion of EDI concepts in the medical community, current physician leadership programming is built on theories that fail to move beyond race and gender as explanatory factors for a lack of diversity in physician leadership. To address inequity, physician leadership curricula should aim to equip physicians to identify and address the structural factors that perpetuate disparities.

Influential Women in the Field of Neurological Rehabilitation: A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Medicine requires the brightest minds, regardless of gender. Women working in the health sciences have time and again demonstrated the value of their technical training, communication skills, emotional support, and ability to provide understandable explanations to their patients. The objective of this work was to carry out a historical review of the main female authors linked to classic sensorimotor neurorehabilitation techniques throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, as well as female authors linked to eponymous tests or assessments, exposing their scientific trajectory and main contributions to the field of neurological rehabilitation. A literature review was conducted. The databases of Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Scopus, CINAHL Medical Science, Medline through EBSCO and PubMed were used to obtain the biographical information of each author, searches of papers were limited until August 2021 in English and Spanish languages. Seventeen female authors were identified who linked to the main rehabilitation techniques or approaches described for neurological rehabilitation and for scales or tests with an eponymous origin as an example of female contribution on neurorehabilitation. Biographical information based on the computerized search in the electronic databases showed 57 potentially relevant articles. Of those articles, 43 were subsequently excluded. Fourteen articles were used to show their contribution to neurorehabilitation. This paper demonstrates the influential role of women in the history of sensorimotor neurorehabilitation throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, linked to the methods, techniques, concepts, or approaches used in physical therapy or occupational therapy.

Assessing the recognition of female orthopaedic surgeons in Castle Connolly's "America's Top Doctors" from 2000 to 2020

BACKGROUND

The field of orthopaedic surgery has one of the lowest percentages of practicing female physicians. Studies have shown disparities in various academic societies' award recipients by sex. Given the recent increased use of physician rating platforms by patients and focus on consumer-driven healthcare, our aim was to assess the recognition of female orthopaedic surgeons.

METHODS

A twenty-year quantitative analysis was performed comparing the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly's "America's Top Doctors" to the percentage of practicing female orthopaedic surgeons as reported by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

RESULTS

From 2000 to 2020, there was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly (1.3%-5.3%), as well as an increase in overall practicing AAOS female members (2.7%-5.8%). When comparing the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons listed on Castle Connolly to the proportion of practicing female AAOS members from 2000 to 2020, there were no statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in the rate of top female orthopaedic surgeons recognized by Castle Connolly was proportionate to the increase in percentage of practicing female AAOS members over the past 20 years. This study highlights the persistence of a gender discrepancy in the academic sector of orthopaedic surgery.

Gender of Award Recipients in Major Ophthalmology Societies

PURPOSE

To assess the gender distribution of major ophthalmology society award recipients DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study METHODS: The study population included award recipients from 9 ophthalmologic societies: American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Glaucoma Society, American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS), American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, American Society of Retina Specialists, American Uveitis Society, Cornea Society, and North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society. A gender-specific pronoun and a photograph of each award recipient were extracted from professional websites to assign their gender. Main outcome measures were gender distribution by award society, year (1970-2020), type (lectureship or not), category (achievement, education, research contribution, research item, international member achievement, public service-global health, service to society), and training level.

RESULTS

Out of 2,150 recipients for 78 awards, 1,606 (74.7%) were men and 544 (25.3%) were women. The proportion of women recipients increased from 0% in 1970 to 33.2% in 2020 (P < .001). Women representation varied within each society (P < .01), with ASCRS having the highest percentage (40.8%). Women received 11.0% of awards accompanied by a lecture. Women received a significantly greater proportion of research-related awards than achievement or service awards. Awards for trainees and early-career ophthalmologists had a greater proportion of women (39.8%) than the rest of the awards (21.5%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, women received awards (25.3%) at a higher rate than the average 1970-2020 American gender distributions of ophthalmologists. However, women are still under-represented in many award categories and subspecialties.

Representation by Gender of Recognition Award Recipients from Gastroenterology and Hepatology Professional Societies

Background: Recognition awards from professional medical societies play an important role in physicians' career advancement. Our aim was to evaluate the gender representation of award recipients from gastroenterology and hepatology societies. Methods: We analyzed the lists of award recipients from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American College of Gastroenterology, American Gastroenterological Association, and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and determined the gender of these award recipients. The primary outcome was the overall representation of women physician award recipients as compared with the representation of women in the specialty. Results: Between 1941 and 2019, there were 921 awards, of which 77 (8.4%) were given to women and 844 (91.6%) to men. There was a significant increase in the proportion of women recipients over time, from 0% in 1970-1984 to 22.0% in 2015-2019 (p for trend <0.0001). Compared with the concurrent representation of women in the specialty, women physician recipients were underrepresented from 1970 to 1981 and 1984 to 2015, equitably represented from 1981 to 1984, and overrepresented from 2015 to 2019. Of the total number of awards in each category, women received 13.8% of teaching/mentorship awards and 3.8% of the highest achievement awards (p = 0.002). The proportion of women recipients varied among the societies, from 6.8% to 14.5%. Conclusions: The representation of women physician recipients of gastroenterology and hepatology society recognition awards has generally been low until most recently, when it has surpassed the proportion of women in the specialty. Because award recognition is important to career development, professional societies should have transparent processes that aim to identify and reduce various forms of bias, including gender-related bias, in all phases of award recognition.

The Matilda Effect: Underrecognition of Women in Hematology and Oncology Awards

BACKGROUND

The proportion of women in the field of hematology and oncology (H&O) has increased over recent decades, but the representation of women in leadership positions remains poor. In an effort to close the gender gap in academia, it is important to report on such inequities in hopes to close these gaps and improve career development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational study of published award recipients from 1994 to 2019 from the seven major H&O societies in the world. Gender was determined based on publicly available data. The χ² and Cochran-Armitage tests were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 1,642 awardees over the past 26 years, 915 met inclusion criteria. Award recipients were overwhelmingly men (77.9%) and non-Hispanic White (84.7%). Women awardees received 30.3% of the humanistic and education-related awards, whereas only receiving 16.0% of basic science awards (p < .01). Women represent 35.6% of all hematologists and oncologists but only received 24.0% of awards given to these physicians (p = .004). Black, Hispanic, and Asian awardees represented 3.7%, 3.3%, and 6.8% of the total awardees, respectively.

CONCLUSION

From 1994 to 2019, women were less likely to receive recognition awards from the seven major H&O societies studied compared with men. We also observed a considerably low proportion of minority awardees across all oncology subspecialties. Further studies examining how selection criteria favor either gender would be warranted in order to achieve equal representation in academic awards.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In this study, women and minority groups were found to be underrepresented amongst award recipients. Significant disparities were seen in disciplines that have been historically male predominant, such as basic sciences. As awards on an international level enhance academic resumes and assist with career advancement, it is important that awards are being given in an equitable manner. First steps to promote diversity and inclusion in academic medicine is reporting of gender and racial disparities in various areas of academia.

Women are underrepresented in prestigious recognition awards in the American Urological Association

OBJECTIVES

To determine the proportion of women who received awards from the American Urological Association (AUA) and evaluate whether this has changed over time as the proportion of practicing female urologists has increased.

METHODS

A retrospective review of award recipients from the AUA website was performed. Gender of award recipient, type of award and year received were collected and the trend over time was compared with the AUA census.

RESULTS

Of the 622 award recipients, 43 (6.9%) were women. There was a larger proportion of women who received early career awards (15/65; 23.1%) compared to women who received more prestigious mid (1/44; 2.3%) or senior (27/513; 5.3%) career awards. Additionally, 17/43 (39.5%) of female award recipients were not clinical urologists, compared to only 33/579 (5.7%) of male award recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased representation by women in the field of urology, women remain underrepresented in awards given by the AUA. Although the proportion of women receiving awards over time has increased, it remains less than expected given the increased proportion of practicing female urologists. Strategic initiatives should be employed to help advance women in academic urology.

Association of Academic Physiatrists Women's Task Force Follow-up Report

ABSTRACT

The Association of Academic Physiatrists convened a Women's Task Force in 2016, under the leadership of then Association of Academic Physiatrists President Gerard Francisco, MD, to evaluate data and metrics pertaining to the representation and inclusion of female physiatrists in the society. An initial published report focused on a retrospective analysis of data in categories such as leadership, conference presentations, and recognition awards. The findings, which highlighted areas in which the Association of Academic Physiatrists had been successful in supporting gender equity as well as areas in which female physiatrists were underrepresented, provided a base from which to strategically focus on closing gaps in representation. The task force developed an action plan that was approved by the Board of Trustees and included strategies aimed at closing gaps and collecting data to determine corresponding effectiveness. Because most of the categories fell under the supervision of various Association of Academic Physiatrists committees, an appointee from each committee ("diversity steward") liaised with the Women's Task Force. The diversity stewards reviewed the plan with their respective committees and collected data within their committee's purview. This task force follow-up report documents recent progress, consistent with the Association of Academic Physiatrists Board of Trustees commitment to transparency and gender equity.

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.

Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Faculty Diversity Trends by Sex, Race, and Ethnicity, 2007 to 2018 in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Sex and race/ethnicity disparities persist in academic Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R). This study contributes to the current body of knowledge by demonstrating changes in academic PM&R by sex and race/ethnicity in multiple categories over a 12-year period.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate workforce disparities in academic PM&R by measuring sex and race/ethnicity diversity in academic degree, rank, and tenure status.

DESIGN

Surveillance study.

SETTING AND METHODS

Self-reported data for PM&R from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) annual Faculty Roster report from 2007 to 2018.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The 12-year average percentage composition in academic degree, rank, and tenure status was calculated to compare the overall distribution. Counts and proportion changes were plotted to depict the temporal trends. Absolute changes in racial percentage composition were graphed to highlight the progress.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2018, the increase by sex was roughly equal (male = 216; female = 236), whereas most of the increase was in White faculty (207). The representation of female and Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) faculty decreased as academic level advanced. Instructors is the only category with a higher proportion of female faculty, from 2007 (53%) to 2018 (59.3%), whereas male faculty occupied over 75% of the full professor positions at any time. Among the non-White faculty, Asian faculty had the greatest increase in proportion of full professors (3.7% to 10%) and Hispanic/Latino faculty in associate professors (2% to 7.1%), whereas full professors who were Black/African American decreased from 4 persons (2.5%) to 2 persons (0.8%).

CONCLUSION

An increase in total number of female and URiM faculty was observed in academic PM&R over 2007 to 2018, but sex and ethnicity/race disparities persisted, especially in higher ranks and leadership positions. For non-White faculty, greater disparities existed, pointing toward the need to target challenges faced by URiM race/ethnicity status.

Systematic review of interventions to improve gender equity in graduate medicine

Women are substantially underrepresented in senior and leadership positions in medicine and experience gendered challenges in their work settings. This systematic review aimed to synthesise research that has evaluated interventions for improving gender equity in medicine. English language electronic searches were conducted across MEDLINE, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Reference list screening was also undertaken. Peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and March 2020 that evaluated interventions to improve gender equity, or the experiences of women, in academic or clinical medicine were reviewed. Dual reviewer data extraction on setting, participants, type of intervention, measurement and outcomes was completed. Methodological rigour and strength of findings were evaluated. In total, 34 studies were included. Interventions were typically focused on equipping the woman (82.4%), that is, delivering professional development activities for women. Fewer focused on changing cultures (20.6%), ensuring equal opportunities (23.5%) or increasing the visibility or valuing of women (23.5%). Outcomes were largely positive (87.3%) but measurement typically relied on subjective, self-report data (69.1%). Few interventions were implemented in clinical settings (17.6%). Weak methodological rigour and a low strength of findings was observed. There has been a focus to-date on interventions which Equip the Woman Interventions addressing systems and culture change require further research consideration. However, institutions cannot wait on high quality research evidence to emerge to take action on gender equity. Data collated suggest a number of recommendations pertaining to research on, and the implementation of, interventions to improve gender equity in academic and clinical settings.

h-Index and Academic Rank by Gender Among Breast Surgery Fellowship Faculty

Background: Gender disparities in academic promotion and leadership are well documented. Scholarly impact is essential for promotion. The Hirsch-index (h-index) is a measure of impact using number of publications and citations. We sought to (i) evaluate breast surgery fellowship faculty in North America by academic rank and research impact using the h-index, (ii) determine whether there is a gender difference in scholarly productivity, and (iii) determine the relationship between academic rank, h-index, and gender. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study of h-index and academic rank disparity in breast surgery faculty by gender was performed. We reviewed the faculty of Society of Surgical Oncology-accredited breast surgery fellowships in February 2019. Rank, gender, academic appointment, years in practice, program directorship, National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center association, size of the program, and h-index (via Scopus) were recorded. Univariate and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Results: Fifty-two programs were identified, and 209 faculty had an h-index. Of them, 69.9% were women and 30.1% were men. h-index increased with academic rank although there was considerable overlap between ranks. Women were underrepresented at the professor level (46.4%), but accounted for the majority of assistant professors (91.5%, p < 0.001), and program directors (70.7%). Men professors had a significantly higher mean h-index than women professors, p < 0.001. However, women associate professors had a higher mean h-index than men, but this did not reach significance. Conclusions: Mean h-index increased with increasing rank among breast surgery faculty for both genders. Average h-index was significantly higher for men professors compared to women professors. No significant gender difference in h-index was found for assistant professors. For associate professors, h-index for women was higher than for men. Women are underrepresented at higher academic ranks despite forming the majority of breast surgical teaching faculty.

Gongs galore: phaleristic study of the relative risk of a healing art related New Year Honour

OBJECTIVES

To compare proportional representation of healthcare specialty workers, in receipt of New Year Honours (NYHs) and examine system bias.

DESIGN

Observational study of UK honours system including comparative analysis of proportional representation of the UK medical workforce.

PARTICIPANTS

Recipients of NYHs from 2010 to 2019.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Absolute risk of receiving an NYH, related to medical specialty, gender and geographical region. Relative risk (RR) of receiving an NYH for services to healthcare related to specialty.

RESULTS

11 207 NYHs were bestowed, with 368 (3.3%) awarded to healthcare professionals: 212 (57.6%) women, 156 (42.4%) men. The RR of a healthcare professional receiving an NYH was 0.76 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.84, p<0.001) when compared with the remaining UK workforce. Doctors received most NYHs (n=181), with public health, clinical oncology and general medicine specialties most likely to be rewarded (RR 20.35 (95% CI 9.61 to 43.08, p<0.001), 8.43 (95% CI 2.70 to 26.30, p<0.001) and 8.22 (95% CI 6.22 to 10.86, p<0.001)), respectively; anaesthetists received fewest NYHs (RR 0.52 (95% CI 0.13 to 2.10), p=0.305). Men were more likely to receive NYHs than women (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.54; p<0.001). Two hundred and fifty-four NYHs (69.0%) were bestowed on residents of England (60, 16.3% London), 49 (13.3%) Scotland (p=0.003), 39 (10.6%) Wales (p<0.001) and 26 (7.1%) Northern-Ireland (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative risk of receiving an NYH varied over 150-fold by specialty, twofold by gender and threefold by geographical location. Public health physicians are perceived to be the pick of the parade.

How Physician Compensation and Education Debt Affects Financial Stress and Burnout: A Survey Study of Women in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the contribution of financial stress to physician burnout and satisfaction among women physiatrists. Relationships among education debt and compensation with demographic, sociologic, and workplace factors were also assessed.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional survey study of women physicians in the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) in the United States. The survey consisted of 51 questions covering demographic information (current and maximum education debt, race/ethnicity, years out of training, practice type and setting, hours worked, family structure, and domestic duties), work/life satisfaction, and burnout. The association between current/maximum debt and demographic characteristics, work/life satisfaction, and physician burnout were examined.

RESULTS

Of the 245 U.S. women attending physiatrists who met inclusion criteria, 222 (90.6%) reported ever having education debt (median category $101 000-150 000) and 162 (66.1%) reported current debt (median category ≤ $50 000). Of these participants, 218 (90.5%) agreed that they would have fewer burnout symptoms if they were able to do more work that is core to their professional mission and 226 (92.2%) agreed that feeling undervalued at work is linked to physiatrists' burnout symptoms. Greater debt was seen in those who identified as Black/African American, were fewer years out of training, practiced general physiatry, and had both inpatient and outpatient responsibilities. Greater current debt had a significant relationship with measurements of work/life dissatisfaction. Burnout was associated with higher debt, lower compensation, more hours worked per week, and fewer hours of exercise performed per week.

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined women physiatrists' perceptions of financial stress and found that greater education debt was associated with personal life dissatisfaction, career regret, and burnout. Further research is needed to address related causes and solutions.

The Neurocritical Care Society Gender Parity Analysis in Grants and Recognition Awards

BACKGROUND

Several recent studies across the field of medicine have indicated gender disparity in the reception of prestigious awards and research grants, placing women in medicine at a distinct disadvantage. Gender disparity has been observed in neurology, critical care medicine and within various professional societies. In this study, we have examined the longitudinal trends of gender parity in awards and grants within the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of all available data longitudinally from 2004, when NCS first granted awards through 2019. We used self-identified gender in the membership roster to record gender for each individual. For individuals without recorded gender, we used a previously validated double verification method using a systematic web-based search. We collected data on six awards distributed by the NCS and divided these awards into two main categories: (1) scientific category: (a) Christine Wijman Young Investigator Award; (b) Best Scientific Abstract Award; (c) Fellowship Grant; (d) INCLINE Grant; and (2) non-scientific category: (a) Travel Grant; and (b) Presidential Citation. Available data were analyzed to evaluate longitudinal trends in awards using descriptive statistics and simple or multiple linear regression analyses, as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 445 awards were granted between the years 2004 and 2019. Thirty-six awards were in the scientific category, while 409 awards were in the non-scientific category. Only 8% of women received NCS awards in the scientific awards category, whereas 44% of women received an award in the non-scientific category. Most notable in the scientific category are the Best Scientific Abstract Award and the Fellowship Grant, in which no woman has ever received an award to date, compared to 18 men between both awards. In contrast, women are well represented in the non-scientific awards category with an average of 5% increase per year in the number of women awardees.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data reveal gender disparity, mainly for scientific or research awards. Prompt evaluation of the cause and further actions to address gender disparity in NCS grants and recognition awards is needed to establish gender equity in this area.

Gender representation among leadership at national and regional cardiothoracic surgery organizational annual meetings

BACKGROUND

Increased attention has been dedicated to gender inequity at scientific meetings. This study evaluated the gender distribution of session leaders at cardiothoracic surgery national and regional meetings.

METHODS

This is a descriptive study of the gender of peer-selected session leaders at 4 cardiothoracic surgery organizations' annual meetings from 2015 to 2019. Session leaders included moderators, panelists, and invited discussants. Data from publicly available programs were used to generate a list of session leaders and organization leaders. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of female session leaders at annual meetings. Descriptive analyses were performed, including the Cochran-Armitage trend test for linear trends of proportions.

RESULTS

A total of 679 sessions over 20 meetings were examined. Of the 3662 session leaders, 480 (13.1%) were women. The proportion of total female session leaders trended positively over time from 9.6% (56 of 581) in 2015 to 15.9% (169 of 1060) in 2019 (P = .001). Among specialty topic sessions, female session leaders were distributed as follows: adult cardiac, 6.9% (81 of 1172); congenital cardiac, 10.8% (47 of 437); and thoracic, 23.2% (155 of 668). The proportion of female session leaders trended significantly only for thoracic sessions (20.6% [21 of 102] in 2015 to 29.2% [58 of 199] in 2019; P = .02). More than one-half of the sessions (57.4%; 390 of 679) featured all-male session leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

Women remain underrepresented in leadership roles at cardiothoracic surgery organizational meetings. This may deter female applicants and has implications for female surgeons' career trajectories; therefore, attention must be given to the potential for unconscious bias in leadership in cardiothoracic surgery.

Representation of women in speaking roles at annual surgical society meetings

BACKGROUND

Women are disproportionately underrepresented in American academic surgery and surgical society leadership; we investigated the proportion of speaking roles held by women across a wide variety of surgical society meetings.

METHODS

Publicly-available data on invited speakers, panelists, and moderators at 23 national surgical societies' annual meetings from 2002 to 2019 were collected. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to evaluate the adjusted trend of gender representation over time for each role.

RESULTS

15.9% of invited speakers were women. Adjusted analysis showed an 8% increase in odds of having female speakers per year (OR1.08, p = 0.002, 95%CI 1.03-1.14). 24.4% of moderators and 22.5% of panelists were female; there was increasing trend in adjusted analysis for both moderators (OR1.09, p < 0.001, 95%CI 1.07-1.11) and panelists (OR1.13, p < 0.001, 95%CI 1.11-1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a wide range in speaking roles held by women at surgical society meetings, but an encouraging trend towards greater parity was seen overall.

Representation of women plenary speakers at the American Academy of Neurology Annual Meeting

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether women have been equitably represented among plenary speakers at the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Annual Meeting by counting and categorizing speakers and comparing outcomes to AAN membership and US neurology workforce data.

METHODS

Lists of plenary speakers between 1958 and 2019 (62 years) were obtained from the AAN. The primary outcome measures were numbers and proportions of men and women in aggregate and among physicians.

RESULTS

We identified 635 plenary speakers, including 148 (23.3%) women. Specifically, women made up 14.6% (19 of 130) of presidential and 25.5% (129 of 505) of nonpresidential plenary session speakers. The inclusion of women plenary speakers was meaningfully higher (h = 0.33; difference 14.9%; 95% confidence interval 4.2%-26.7%) for nonphysicians (27 of 74 [36.5%]) than physicians (121 of 561 [21.6%]). Although at zero levels for Annual Meetings held between 1958 and 1990 and at mostly low but varying levels thereafter, the representation of women and women physicians has been at or above their proportions in the AAN membership and US neurology workforce since 2017. Comparison of representation by plenary session name revealed an unequal distribution of women, with women physicians concentrated in the Sidney Carter Award in Child Neurology presidential session.

CONCLUSION

Historically and recently, women and women physicians were underrepresented among AAN plenary speakers. As the AAN has taken active steps to address equity, women have been included in more representative proportions overall. However, notable gaps remain, especially in specific prestigious plenary sessions, and further research is needed to determine causality.

Gender Disparity in Awards in General Surgery Residency Programs

IMPORTANCE

Women are disproportionately underrecognized as award winners within medical societies. The presence of this disparity has not been investigated in training programs.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the presence of a gender disparity in award winners in general surgery residency programs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this retrospective survey study, 32 geographically diverse academic and independent general surgery residency programs were solicited for participation. The 24 participating programs (75.0%) submitted deidentified data regarding the gender distribution of residents and trainee award recipients for the period from July 1, 1996, to June 30, 2017. Data were analyzed from September 11, 2017, to December 21, 2018.

EXPOSURES

Time and the proportion of female trainees.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the percentage of female award winners. A multilevel logistic regression model accounting for the percentage of female residents in each program compared the odds of a female resident winning an award relative to a male resident. This analysis was repeated for the first and second decades of the study. Award winners were further analyzed by type of award (clinical excellence, nonclinical excellence, teaching, or research) and selection group (medical students, residents, or faculty members).

RESULTS

A total of 5030 of 13 760 resident person-years (36.6%) and 455 of 1447 award winners (31.4%) were female. Overall, female residents were significantly less likely to receive an award compared with male residents (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.37-0.54; P < .001). During the first decade of the study, female residents were 70.8% less likely to receive an award compared with male residents (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.19-0.45; P < .001); this improved to 49.9% less likely in the second decade (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.42-0.61; P < .001). Female residents were less likely to receive an award for teaching (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.26-0.42; P < .001), clinical excellence (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.31-0.61; P < .001), or nonclinical excellence (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.98; P = .04). No statistical difference was observed for research award winners (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.42-1.12; P = .17). The largest discrepancies were observed when award recipients were chosen by residents (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14-0.39; P < .001) and students (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.25-0.42; P < .001) compared with faculty members (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.66; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that female residents were significantly underrepresented as award recipients. These findings suggest the presence of ongoing implicit bias in surgery departments and training programs.

Endocrine surgery is at the forefront of gender diversity

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to assess gender diversity across surgical subspecialties, with a focus on endocrine surgery.

METHODS

We collected publicly-reported data from Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and American Association of Endocrine Surgeons (AAES) during the 2017 data period. Student's t-test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used to compare percentages of female surgeons. We analyzed data by geographical regions, excluding states where data was unreported/unavailable.

RESULTS

During this period, there were 25,022 general surgeons. Of these, 5157 (20.6%) were female. There were 513 endocrine surgeons, of which 179 (34.8%) were female (p < 0.001). Across the US, endocrine surgery had the greatest percentage of female surgeons (34.8%) compared to other surgical subspecialties (p < 0.001). When comparing geographical regions, the Northeast (22.8%) and West (22.8%) contained the highest percentages of female general surgeons, while the South comprised the greatest proportion of female endocrine surgeons (38.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Endocrine surgery has the most gender diversity of all studied surgical subspecialties. The Southern US has the greatest proportion of female endocrine surgeons.

Supporting Inclusion, Diversity, Access, and Equity in the Infectious Disease Workforce

In medicine, a wide array of evidence demonstrates the presence of gender, racial, ethnic, and other disparities in representation, compensation, and career development. These disparities also exist in the field of infectious diseases, providing important opportunities for the Infectious Diseases Society of America to identify and report its successes in and challenges to achieving equity. In this article, we review the literature documenting challenges with equity broadly in medicine and specifically in infectious diseases. We then introduce the Be Ethical Campaign, an initiative that encourages healthcare leaders to use metrics and data analysis to identify workforce equity gaps and pursue opportunities to close them.

Proportion of female recipients of resident-selected awards across Canada from 2000 to 2018: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Female physicians have been shown to receive fewer awards from medical societies than their male colleagues. We examined the sex distribution of recipients of Canadian residency association awards.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study of the sex of staff and resident physician recipients of resident-selected awards from provincial and national residency associations using data from 2000-2018. We classified awards into professionalism, advocacy and wellness awards, and education and teaching awards based on award names and descriptions, and compared the proportion of male and female recipients in these categories.

RESULTS

We identified 314 recipients of staff physician awards and 129 recipients of resident physician awards. Male staff and resident physicians had higher odds of receiving awards than their female counterparts (odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.89 and OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18-2.46, respectively). There was a reduction in the odds of male residents' receiving an award over the study period (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98). Male physicians had higher odds of receiving education and teaching awards than female physicians as staff but not as residents (OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.72-5.95 and OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.84-4.60, respectively).

INTERPRETATION

Male staff and resident physicians in Canada had higher odds of receiving awards from provincial and national residency associations between 2000 and 2018 than their female counterparts. Given this disparity, it would be prudent for organizations that distribute awards to physicians, residents and medical students to examine their nomination criteria and processes for potential bias.

Bend it like Beckham or fix them like Florence-proportional representation of healthcare in New Year honours: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the proportional representation of healthcare workers in receipt of New Year honours (NYHs) with workers in other industries and to determine whether the NYH system has gender or geographical biases.

DESIGN

Observational study of the UK honours system with a comparative analysis of proportional representation of the UK workforce and subgroup analyses of gender and geographical representations.

PARTICIPANTS

Recipients of NYHs from 2009 to 2018.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Absolute risk of receiving an NYH based on industry, gender, or region of the UK. Relative risk of receiving an NYH for services to healthcare compared with other industries.

RESULTS

10 989 NYHs were bestowed from 2009 to 2018, 47% of which were awarded to women. 832 awards (7.6%) were for services to healthcare. People working in sport and in the arts and media were more likely to receive NYHs than those working in healthcare (relative risks of 22.01 (95% confidence interval 19.91 to 24.34) and 5.84 (5.31 to 6.44), respectively). There was no significant difference between the rate of receiving honours for healthcare and for science and technology (P=0.22). 34% (3741) of awards were issued to people living in London and in the southeast of England, and only 496 of 1447 (34%) higher order awards (knighthoods, damehoods, companions of honour, and commanders of the order of the British empire) were received by women.

CONCLUSIONS

In relation to the size of its workforce, a career in healthcare is not as "honourable" as careers in certain other industries. Geographical and gender biases might exist in the honours system.

Gender Disparity in Leadership Positions of General Surgical Societies in North America, Europe, and Oceania

Background 

Despite the number of female medical-school applicants reaching an all-time high and the increasing number of females in surgical training, males retain an overwhelming majority in senior surgical academic positions and formal leadership positions. This study aims to better understand the extent of and influences for gender disparity in general surgical societies throughout North America, Europe, and Oceania. 

Methods 

Data collection for this retrospective cross-sectional study took place between June and December 2017. Committee and subcommittee members from the eight selected general surgical societies that met the inclusion criteria (n = 311) were compiled into an Excel spreadsheet in which the data was recorded. Analyzed metrics included university academic ranking, surgical society leadership position, h-index, number of citations, and total publications. SCOPUS database (Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands) was used to generate author metrics, and STATA version 14.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX) was used for statistical analysis.

Results

Overall, 83.28% of members of the entities we studied were male and 16.72% were females. Males had significantly higher representation than females in all societies (Pearson chi² = 29.081; p-value = 0.010). Females were underrepresented in all society leadership positions and university academic rankings. Male members had a higher median h-index, more number of citations, and more total publications.

Conclusions

The composition of the general surgical societies included in this study demonstrated significant gender disparity. Female inclusivity initiatives and policies must be initiated to promote greater research productivity and early career opportunities for female surgeons in the specialty of general surgery.

Representation of Women Among Invited Speakers at Medical Specialty Conferences

Background: Gender-related differences have been found among invited speakers in select professional and medical societies. We examined whether similar disparities existed among keynote speakers, plenary speakers, and invited lecturers in a broad range of medical specialty conferences from 2013 to 2017. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on 27 U.S. medical specialty conferences for which data were available on plenary speakers, keynote speakers, and/or invited lecturers. For each speaker, gender and degree(s) were determined. Fisher's exact test was performed to compare proportions of women among speakers to Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC) physician workforce data on gender distribution. Results: In aggregate, we identified 246 women among 984 speakers, significantly lower than expected when compared with 2015 AAMC data (25.0% vs. 34.0%; p < 0.00001). Compared with AAMC data reported in 2013, 2015, and 2017, women were significantly underrepresented in 2013 (p = 0.0064) and 2015 (p = 0.00004). In 2017, the proportion of women among invited speakers trended lower than AAMC active women physicians but did not reach significance (p = 0.309). Analysis of individual conference data stratified by year indicated that, while the representation of women among all speakers improved between 2015 and 2017, the representation of women among keynote speakers, plenary speakers, and invited lectureships was variable (including zero levels some years during the study period) and remained lower than expected as compared with workforce data for specific medical specialties. Conclusions: Evaluating for and improving disparities is recommended to ensure gender equity among invited speakers across all medical specialty conferences.

Achieving Gender and Social Equality: More Than Gender Parity Is Needed

In this Perspective, the authors review Association of American Medical Colleges data on gender parity and intersectionality, consider the literature on gender parity in academic medicine and the underlying gender norms that explain these statistics, and offer recommendations for moving past indicators of parity to achieve gender and social equality.Improvements in gender parity among medical school graduates have not translated to gender parity among practicing physicians or medical school faculty, particularly for racial/ethnic minorities. Further, gender parity does not correspond to gender equality, such that gender-based disparities in salaries and advancement persist. In addition, social norms related to traditional gender role expectations reinforce existing biases and lead to sexual harassment and discrimination against women in the workplace.Building on their analysis of existing data and the literature, the authors offer concrete recommendations to achieve gender equality in academic medicine that not only improve parity but also support policies and practices to address the norms that further bias and discrimination. These recommendations include the collection, monitoring, and open reporting of data on salaries as well as on sex and race/ethnicity; stronger policies related to family leave and sexual discrimination and harassment; and accountability structures to ensure that policies are enforced. While these efforts alone cannot eliminate gender inequalities, academic medicine should be at the forefront of creating a climate in medicine that is supportive of gender equality as part of their larger goal of promoting social equality.

Women in Podiatry and Medicine

The role of female physicians has advanced among western medicine. Women now constitute a majority within medical schools, and the number of women in podiatric medicine and surgery has increased over the last 5 decades. Conversely, female physicians continue to face barriers to closing the gender gap. They have lower academic standings and fewer publications, receive less awards/grants, are underrepresented in leadership positions, have a lower incidence pursuing surgical specialties, and receive lower compensation. Women experience an increased rate of burnout, gender discrimination, and sexual harassment. Increasing awareness of the gender gap is vital to the enhancement of the medical community.

Understanding and addressing gender equity for women in neurology

Despite the fact that the percentages of women among physicians and neurologists have been rising, gender-related disparities in numerous metrics persist, notably in compensation, promotion, funding, recognition, leadership, publishing, and speaking. Simultaneously, women working in academia, including medicine, face high rates of sexual harassment. Leaders of all health care-related organizations must accept the moral and ethical imperative to expeditiously address both gender-related discrimination and harassment (inclusive of but not limited to sexual harassment) of women in medicine. At this unique time in history, there is an opportunity for leaders in neurology to strategically accelerate efforts to address workforce gender disparities and ensure harassment-free training and work environments. Leaders will have to plan an intentional path forward, using a systematic process, metrics, and strategies unique to their own organizations, to overcome barriers to an equitable and safe work environment for women. Moreover, leaders in 4 gatekeeper organizations—medical schools/academic medical centers, funding agencies, journals, and medical societies—must hold each other accountable for gender equity as their own success and financial return on investment is dependent on the efforts of those in the other categories. In short, the path forward is to focus on ethical principles and behavior when it comes to addressing workforce gender disparities for women in medicine.

Physician Workforce Disparities and Patient Care: A Narrative Review

Background: Ensuring the strength of the physician workforce is essential to optimizing patient care. Challenges that undermine the profession include inequities in advancement, high levels of burnout, reduced career duration, and elevated risk for mental health problems, including suicide. This narrative review explores whether physicians within four subpopulations represented in the workforce at levels lower than predicted from their numbers in the general population-women, racial and ethnic minorities in medicine, sexual and gender minorities, and people with disabilities-are at elevated risk for these problems, and if present, how these problems might be addressed to support patient care. In essence, the underlying question this narrative review explores is as follows: Do physician workforce disparities affect patient care? While numerous articles and high-profile reports have examined the relationship between workforce diversity and patient care, to our knowledge, this is the first review to examine the important relationship between diversity-related workforce disparities and patient care. Methods: Five databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, and EBSCO Discovery Service) were searched by a librarian. Additional resources were included by authors, as deemed relevant to the investigation. Results: The initial database searches identified 440 potentially relevant articles. Articles were categorized according to subtopics, including (1) underrepresented physicians and support for vulnerable patient populations; (2) factors that could exacerbate the projected physician deficit; (3) methods of addressing disparities among underrepresented physicians to support patient care; or (4) excluded (n=155). The authors identified another 220 potentially relevant articles. Of 505 potentially relevant articles, 199 (39.4%) were included in this review. Conclusions: This report demonstrates an important gap in the literature regarding the impact of physician workforce disparities and their effect on patient care. This is a critical public health issue and should be urgently addressed in future research and considered in clinical practice and policy decision-making.

Disrupting gender norms in health systems: making the case for change

Restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities are replicated and reinforced in health systems, contributing to gender inequalities in health. In this Series paper, we explore how to address all three through recognition and then with disruptive solutions. We used intersectional feminist theory to guide our systematic reviews, qualitative case studies based on lived experiences, and quantitative analyses based on cross-sectional and evaluation research. We found that health systems reinforce patients' traditional gender roles and neglect gender inequalities in health, health system models and clinic-based programmes are rarely gender responsive, and women have less authority as health workers than men and are often devalued and abused. With regard to potential for disruption, we found that gender equality policies are associated with greater representation of female physicians, which in turn is associated with better health outcomes, but that gender parity is insufficient to achieve gender equality. We found that institutional support and respect of nurses improves quality of care, and that women's empowerment collectives can increase health-care access and provider responsiveness. We see promise from social movements in supporting women's reproductive rights and policies. Our findings suggest we must view gender as a fundamental factor that predetermines and shapes health systems and outcomes. Without addressing the role of restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities within and outside health systems, we will not reach our collective ambitions of universal health coverage and the Sustainable Development Goals. We propose action to systematically identify and address restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities in health systems.