An Exploration of Gender Bias Affecting Women in Medicine

Recent Trends in Successful Neurosurgery Resident Matriculation: A Retrospective and Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior literature has demonstrated barriers to successful residency matching, including sex, medical school background, and international medical graduate status. Our aim is to characterize the recent trends in successfully-matched residents, with particular attention to geography and academic productivity.

METHODS

Resident information, including demographics and educational background, was gathered from program websites. Bibliometric analysis focused on PubMed publications from the top neurosurgery journals. A top 20 medical school was defined using the US News Rankings for research in 2022. Regression analyses were performed to explore the associations between total and first-author publications and other relevant factors, correcting for graduate studies.

RESULTS

A total of 114 institutions and 946 residents were included in the final analysis. Of the 845 with medical school information, 62 (7.3%) completed medical school internationally and 181 of 783 (23.1%) came from a top 20 medical school. Male residents had a higher proportion of residents with international undergraduate and international medical school degrees when compared to female residents [32 (7.5%) vs. 4 (2.4%), P = 0.021; 52 (8.6%) vs. 10 (4.2%), P = 0.026; respectively]. The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated a significant increase in publications for international medical school graduates (B = 8.3, P < 0.001), top tier medical school graduate (B = 1.3, P = 0.022), and male sex (B = 1.20, P = 0.019) for total number of publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Geographical factors, reported sex, and graduation status have influenced how resident candidates are perceived. Understanding these trends is vital for future resident matching. Addressing gender and educational diversity is essential to foster inclusivity and research-driven environments in neurosurgery residency programs.

Gender disparities in postoperative outcomes following elective spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several studies have described disparities between male and female patients following spine surgery, but no pooled analyses have performed a robust review characterizing differences in postoperative outcomes based on gender. The purpose of this study was to broadly assess the effects of gender on postoperative outcomes following elective spine surgery.

METHODS

Between November 2022 and March 2023, PubMed, MEDLINE, ERIC, and Embase were queried using artificial intelligence-assisted software for relevant cohort studies. Cohort studies with a minimum sample of 100 patients conducted in the United States since 2010 were eligible. Studies related to trauma, tumors, infections, and spinal cord pathology were excluded. Independent extraction by multiple reviewers was performed using Nested Knowledge software. A fixed- or random-effects model was used if heterogeneity among included studies in a meta-analysis was < 50% or ≥ 50%, respectively. Risk of bias was assessed independently by multiple reviewers using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled effect sizes were calculated for readmission, nonroutine discharge (NRD), length of stay (LOS), extended LOS, reoperation, mortality, all medical complications (individual analyses for cardiovascular, deep venous thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, genitourinary, neurological, respiratory, and systemic infection complications), and wound-related complications. For each outcome, two subanalyses were performed with studies that used either center-based (single- or multi-institution) or high-volume (national or state-wide) databases.

RESULTS

Across 124 included studies, male patients had an increased incidence of mortality (OR 0.54, p < 0.0001) and all medical complications (OR 0.80, p = 0.0114), specifically cardiovascular (OR 0.68, p < 0.0001) and respiratory (OR 0.76, p = 0.0008) complications. Female patients were more likely to experience a wound-related surgical complication (OR 1.16, p = 0.0183). These findings persisted in the high-volume database subanalyses. Only center-based subanalyses showed that female patients were at greater odds of experiencing an NRD (OR 1.18, p = 0.0476), longer LOS (SMD 0.23, p = 0.0036), and extended LOS (OR 1.28, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Males are more likely to experience death and medical complications, whereas females were more likely to face wound-related surgical complications. At the institution level, females more often experience NRD and longer hospital stays. These findings may better inform preoperative expectation management and provide more detailed postoperative risk assessments based on the patient's gender.

"I am the doctor": gender-based bias within the clinical practice of emergency medicine in Canada-a thematic analysis of physician and trainee interview data

OBJECTIVES

While women comprise about half of current Canadian medical students and physicians, only 31% of emergency medicine physicians identify as women and women trainees are less likely to express interest in emergency medicine compared to men. Gender-based bias continues to negatively impact the career choice, progress, and well-being of women physicians/trainees. Although instances of gender-based bias are well documented within other medical specialties, there remains a gap in the literature addressing the role of gender specific to the Canadian emergency medicine clinical environment.

METHODS

Using a qualitative study with a thematic analytical approach, participants were purposively and snowball sampled from a cross-section of centers across Canada and included emergency medicine attending physicians and trainees. A thematic analysis using an inductive and deductive approach was undertaken. All data were double coded to improve study trustworthiness. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the study population.

RESULTS

Thirty-four individuals (17 woman-identifying and 17 man-identifying) from 10 different institutions across 4 provinces in Canada participated in the study. Six themes were identified: (1) women experience gender bias in the form of microaggressions; (2) women experience imposter syndrome and question their role in the clinical setting; (3) more women provide patient care to women patients and vulnerable populations; (4) gender-related challenges with family planning and home responsibilities affect work-life balance; (5) allyship and sponsorship are important for the support and development of women physicians and trainees; and (6) women value discussing shared experiences with other women to debrief situations, find mentorship, and share advice.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender inequity in emergency medicine affects women-identifying providers at all levels of training across Canada. Described experiences support several avenues to implement change against perceived gender bias that is focused on education, policy, and supportive spaces. We encourage institutions to consider these recommendations to achieve gender-equitable conditions in emergency medicine across Canada.

Does gender still matter in the pursuit of a career in anaesthesia?

A survey sent to fellows of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) aimed to document issues affecting gender equity in the anaesthesia workplace. A response rate of 38% was achieved, with women representing a greater proportion of respondents (64.2%). On average women worked fewer hours than men and spent a larger percentage of time in public practice; however, satisfaction rates were similar between genders. There was a gender pay gap which could not be explained by the number of hours worked or years since achieving fellowship. The rates of bullying and harassment were high among all genders and have not changed in 20 years since the first gender equity survey by Strange Khursandi in 1998. Women perceived that they were more likely to be discriminated against particularly in the presence of other sources of discrimination, and highlighted the importance of the need for diversity and inclusion in anaesthetic workplaces. Furthermore, women reported higher rates of caregiving and unpaid domestic responsibilities, confirming that anaesthetists are not immune to the factors affecting broader society despite our professional status. The overall effect was summarised by half of female respondents reporting that they felt their gender was a barrier to a career in anaesthesia. While unable to be included in statistics due to low numbers, non-binary gendered anaesthetists responded and must be included in all future work. The inequities documented here are evidence that ANZCA's gender equity subcommittee must continue promoting and implementing policies in workplaces across Australia and New Zealand.

Does Sponsorship Promote Equity in Career Advancement in Academic Medicine? A Scoping Review

Sponsorship describes a set of actions wherein an influential champion (sponsor) uses their position to actively support a colleague's career by helping them gain visibility, recognition, and/or positions. There is growing awareness of the importance of sponsorship for career advancement in academic medicine, particularly for women and those who are historically underrepresented and excluded in medicine (UIM). This scoping review examines the current landscape of evidence, and knowledge gaps, on sponsorship as it relates to career advancement in academic medicine for women and UIM faculty. We searched peer-reviewed literature in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (WoS) over the past 50 years (from 1973 through July 2023). Sixteen studies were included in the final review. We found relative consensus on sponsorship definition and value to career advancement. Heterogeneity in study design limited our ability to directly compare study outcomes. All included studies focused on gender differences in sponsorship: two of four quantitative studies found men were more likely to receive sponsorship, one reported no gender differences, and one was insufficiently powered. All but one of the qualitative studies reported gender differences, with women less likely to access or be identified for sponsorship. The mixed-methods studies suggested sponsorship may vary by career stage. Only two studies analyzed sponsorship for UIM populations. The existing data are inconclusive regarding best ways to measure and assess sponsorship, what institutional support (e.g., structured programs, formal recognition, or incentives for sponsorship) should look like, and at what career stage sponsorship is most important. Addressing this knowledge gap will be critically important for understanding what sponsorship best practices, if any, should be used to promote equity in career advancement in academic medicine. We advocate for commitment at the institutional and national levels to develop new infrastructure for transparently and equitably supporting women and UIM in career advancement.

Gender Inequity in Clinical Clerkships and its Influence on Career Selection: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify the frequency, form, and underlying factors contributing to gender inequity experienced by medical undergraduates and assess its influence on their career choices.

Method

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective survey with a 100% response rate. This survey was distributed among medical students of clinical years in Karachi's private and government medical colleges from September 10th, 2021-March 30th, 2022. 430 participants were enrolled using a simple-random-sampling-technique. Chi-square/Fisher's Exact tests are employed to assess the relationships between gender and gender-based inequity in various specialties, including their characteristics, influence on career choices, adverse psychological effects, and potential mitigation strategies.

Results

Among 430 respondents, 28.6% were male, and 71.4% were female. 89.1% reported gender inequity, evenly distributed in government (80.4%) and private institutions (88.1%). The general surgery and gynecology disciplines stood out, each with a 56% prevalence. In gynecology and surgery clinical-clerkships, both genders experienced similar rates, with females at 54.5% and 42.3%, and males at 56.7% and 61.6%, respectively (P-value = .000*). Disrespect from staff/professors/patients (48.8%) was the most common manifestation, driven by factors like preferences (73.7%), gender superiority (62.6%), societal attitudes (54%), and cultural norms (50.9%). Furthermore, 82.6% of students reported that gender inequity had a negative impact on their career decision (Male = 82.9%;Female = 82.4%, P-value = .899). Additionally, gender inequity also caused demotivation (78.1%), poor self-esteem (67.2%), helplessness/hopelessness (48.6%), and frustration (45.8%).

Conclusions

Gender inequity is widely prevalent in the clinical-clerkships, affecting medical students' career decisions and mental health, stressing the need to prioritize and implement solutions at the undergraduate clinical-clerkship level.

Accomplished women leaders in informatics: insights about successful careers

We sought to learn from the experiences of women leaders in informatics by interviewing women in Informatics leadership roles. Participants reported career challenges, how they built confidence, advice to their younger selves, and suggestions for attracting and retaining additional women. Respondents were 16 women in leadership roles in academia (n = 9) and industry (n = 7). We conducted a thematic analysis revealing: (1) careers in informatics are serendipitous and nurtured by supportive communities, (2) challenges in leadership were profoundly related to gender issues, (3) "Big wins" in informatics careers were about making a difference, and (4) women leaders highlighted resilience, excellence, and personal authenticity as important for future women leaders. Sexism is undeniably present, although not all participants reported overt gender barriers. Confidence and authenticity in leadership point to the value offered by individual leaders. The next step is to continue to foster an informatics culture that encourages authenticity across the gender spectrum.

Assessment of Gender Bias During Paramedic-Physician Handoffs

Objective Gender bias against female physicians has been frequently demonstrated and associated with negative feelings toward their careers. Gender bias has also been demonstrated in prehospital clinical care. However, potential gender bias during paramedic-physician handoffs has not been studied. This study aimed to identify gender bias during interactions between prehospital personnel and emergency physicians at the time of patient handoff. Methods An observational study was conducted at an urban academic emergency department. Observers were trained to record information from paramedic-physician handoffs but were blind to the nature of the study. The primary outcome was to whom paramedics initially directed the focus of their handoff report based on physician gender, with secondary outcomes of to whom paramedics directed most of their report and whether they asked about further questions based on physician gender. Results There were 784 observed handoffs. There was no significant association between the gender of the physician and which physician received first attention (χ2 {1, N = 782} = 0.9736, p = 0.3238) or majority attention (χ2 {1, N = 780} = 1.9414, p = 0.1635). Paramedics were more likely to ask questions to male attendings than female attendings (χ2 {1, N = 784} = 4.4319, p = 0.0353). Conclusion We identified limited differences in communication based on gender between paramedics and physicians during emergency department patient handoffs.