Sex Differences in Faculty Rank Among Academic Cardiologists in the United States

Gender(ed) science: How the institutionalization of gender continues to shape the conduct and content of women's health research

Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, and attributes that a particular society considers appropriate for men and women based on assumptions about biological sex. It also operates as a major social organizing principle that confers unequal power, status, and resources to men and women, with direct consequences for health. Historic patriarchal and misogynistic beliefs and values are reinforced through social institutions, including health science, which reify gender inequities. This commentary examines two key domains in which the social organization and institutionalization of gender in scientific research affect the conduct of women's health research and, by extension, women's health outcomes. These domains are: 1) decisions about which topics are prioritized, researched, and funded and 2) the dissemination of research findings. Using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a case study to illustrate broader patterns in scientific research, we present evidence of gender-based inequities in what is prioritized, deemed fundable, and disseminated, and how this affects knowledge production and attention to women's health. We highlight efforts and progress made by the NIH and call for additional attention to further address gender-based inequities and their impact on women's health research. We conclude with a call for critical social science analyses-ideally supported by the NIH-of the social organization of health science research to identify points of intervention for redressing deep-seated obstacles to advancing research on women's health.

Mind the Gap! Working Toward Gender Equity in Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease: Present and Future

Evidence from medicine and other fields has shown that gender diversity results in better decision making and outcomes. The incoming workforce of congenital heart specialists (especially in pediatric cardiology) appears to be more gender balanced, but past studies have shown many inequities. Gender-associated differences in leadership positions, opportunities presented for academic advancement, and recognition for academic contributions to the field persist. In addition, compensation packages remain disparate if evaluated based on gender with equivalent experience and expertise. This review explores these inequities and has suggested individual and institutional changes that could be made to recruit and retain women, monitor the climate of the institution, and identify and eliminate bias in areas like salary and promotions.

Organizational Leadership Gender Differences in Medical Schools and Affiliated Universities

Objective: To compare gender compositions in the leadership of the top 25 medical schools in North America with the leadership of their affiliated university senior leadership and other faculties. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional observational study used publicly available gender data from 2018 to 2019 of universities drawn from the U.S. News Best Global Universities for Clinical Medicine Ranking report. Gender compositions in eight leadership tiers from senior leadership to medical school department directors were analyzed. Data analysis included gender compositions by leadership tier and faculty. Results: Male representation is greater at higher leadership tiers, with the largest imbalance being at the level of medical school department heads. The faculty of medicine has more men in leadership positions than the average of the other faculties (p = 0.02), though similar to schools of engineering, business, dentistry, and pharmacy. Across the eight leadership tiers, a significant trend exists between tier and proportions, indicating that male representation was greater at higher tiers (p < 0.001). No correlation was found between a university's leadership gender composition and its ranking. Conclusion: The under-representation of women is greater in medical school leadership than the leadership of their affiliated universities. The faculty of medicine has greater male over-representation than the average of the other faculties.

Sex Disparities in Cardiovascular Disease

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women. It remains underdiagnosed, undertreated, and portends worse outcomes in women than men. Disparities exist in every stage of science, from bench research to the editorial board of major journals and in every cardiovascular subspecialty. This review summarizes differences in cardiovascular risk factors and disparities in management and outcomes of ischemic heart disease, heart failure, aortic stenosis, and atrial fibrillation. It also provides an overview of female representation as participants and leaders of clinical trials, editorial boards, and academic institutions. Strategies to overcome these disparities are proposed with examples of successful programs.

Hematologic health services and practical characteristics: report of a nationwide survey among Chinese hematologists

BACKGROUND

In the past 40 years, China has experienced tremendous economic development, but the current situation of hematologists has rarely been reported. A landscape survey of human resources is essential for healthcare development and policy formulation in the future.

METHODS

The Chinese Society of Hematology initiated a survey of Chinese hematologists in mainland China for evaluating demographic and practice characteristics. Respondents were anonymous, and there were no limitations regarding their age, sex, etc. RESULTS: Totally 2032 hematologists responded, with a median age bracket of 36-45 years. Respondents were well engaged into subspecialties, and 28.1% acquired doctorates of philosophy. Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) centers have been established all over China. Higher-GDP regions reported more advantages, including bigger scale of transplant centers (P < 0.001), younger age structure (P = 0.039), better education qualifications (P = 0.001) and less turnover intentions (P = 0.004), despite of increased risk of medical disputes (P = 0.028). Although females accounted for 65.5% of hematologists, males were older (P < 0.001), and had more senior professional titles (P < 0.001), academic positions (P < 0.001), opportunities for continuing education (P < 0.001), and paper publishing in the recent two years (P = 0.001). For turnover intention, the higher GDP regions led to an independently reduced risk (HR = 0.673, 95%CI [0.482-0.940], P = 0.020), whereas medical disputes resulted in an increased the risk (HR = 2.037, 95%CI [1.513-2.743], P < 0.001). Considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, majority of respondents believed that the decline in patient visits and delay in treatment was within 30%. 67.9% of respondents reported a decrease of the use of bone marrow as grafts but 18.8% reported an increase of cord blood units. 35.0% of the respondents switched their daily work to support the anti-epidemic medical activities.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded the discipline of hematology in China has flourished in recent years with a young workforce, while regional economic and gender disparities warrant further continuous optimization. Joint efforts against the impact of COVID-19 are needed in the post-pandemic era.

Advanced degrees, gender, and professional rank in surgery, disparities in academic medicine

INTRODUCTION

Women comprise nearly half of all residents in training, yet there is a significant disparity of women in academic leadership. Surgical subspecialties are dominated by men in both percentages of physicians and leadership positions. We sought to examine the association of advanced non-medical degrees with academic rank and gender in academic surgery departments.

METHODS

Faculty from 126 ACGME-accredited academic medical centers were analyzed to identify faculty gender as described in online biographical information, advanced non-medical degrees, academic rank, and additional leadership positions held. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

4536 surgeons were identified, 69.3% men, 27.3% female, and 3.3% unlisted. Female surgeons were more likely to hold advanced non-doctoral degrees than men (18.2% vs. 13.8%, p ​< ​0.002). Among those with advanced degrees, PhDs were held by 3.3% of women and 5.7% of men (p ​< ​0.001). Female surgeons were less likely to hold the rank of Professor than male surgeons (15.8% vs 30.3%, p ​< ​0.001), and more likely to hold the rank of Assistant Professor than male surgeons (51.9% vs 36.1%, p ​< ​0.001). This likelihood remained true when analyzing only surgeons with one or more advanced non-medical degrees. Men were more likely to be Chair of Surgery (3.0%), Division Chief (9.6%), and Research Chair (0.5%); compared to women (1.3%; 4.8%; 0.2%; p ​= ​0.001, <0.001, 0.21 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There continues to be a significant male predominance in general surgery. Gender discrepancy is also seen in professional rank and academic title despite women holding more advanced degrees. Advanced degrees are currently considered academic qualifications, but this does not reflect surgical academic leadership roles or rank.

Trends in the proportion of women speakers at North American Allergy and Immunology conferences, 2008 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Women in medicine continue to be underrepresented at medical conferences. Previous studies have evaluated the proportion of invited female speakers across multiple specialties and evaluated factors that may have led to this disparity. The field of Allergy and Immunology has often been excluded and analyses have not illustrated how the trends have changed over the past decade.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the distribution of invited speakers by gender over time at the 3 largest North American Allergy and Immunology conferences.

METHODS

This retrospective longitudinal analysis used conference programs from 2008 to 2020 from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (AAAAI), the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI), and the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (CSACI). The gender (binary definition, man or woman, based on names, photos, pronouns, from conference programs and institutional profiles) of invited speakers was analyzed as the primary outcome, and planning committee members, and multispeaker sessions as secondary outcomes. These data were compared with publicly available data on the composition of the specialty by gender in the United States and Canada.

RESULTS

Women speakers at AAAAI, ACAAI, and CSACI conferences have historically been lower than male speakers and underrepresented compared with specialty composition. However, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of women speakers over time for all 3 conferences individually (AAAAI: 23.7% in 2008, 41.1% by 2020; ACAAI: 16.7% in 2008, 37.3% by 2020; CSACI: 19.4% in 2008, 54.8% by 2020; P < .001 for each) and combined (21.3% in 2008, 40.7% by 2020, P < .001). This trend coincides with a significant increase in women on the planning committee (all conferences: 20% in 2008, 50.6% by 2020; P < .001). There is also a decreasing trend over time for men-only multispeaker sessions.

CONCLUSION

This study sheds light on the trends of women speaker representation at Allergy and Immunology conferences and provides clarity on future needs to reach equal representation in this field.

Primum Non Discernere: Glass Ceilings and Female Representation at the European Association of Urology and European Society for Paediatric Urology Annual Meetings, 2012-2022

Background

The term glass ceiling coined by Loden in 1978 is commonly used to describe difficulties faced by minorities and women when trying to move into senior roles.

Objective

To analyse trends and patterns for female representation at the European Association of Urology (EAU) and European Society for Paediatric Urology (ESPU) annual general meetings over the past decade.

Design setting and participants

We used objective data on female representation in the roles of chairs, moderators, and lecture speakers at the EAU and ESPU meetings from 2012 to 2022.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

We evaluated gender based representation in paediatric urology sessions at the EAU and ESPU meetings, collecting data on the overall number of sessions, lectures, symposiums, abstract/poster sessions, and courses, and analysed the male/female ratio. Data were derived from printed and digital programmes for the relevant meetings.

Results and limitations

During the period from 2012 to 2022, the percentage female representation varied from 0% (2012) to a maximum of 35% (2022) at EUA paediatric urology sessions, and from 13.5% (2014) to a maximum of 32% (2022) at ESPU meetings. Both associations show clear progression towards equality.

Conclusions

Female representation at EAU and ESPU meetings has risen over the years, reaching 35% and 32%, respectively, in 2022, which is in line with the number of female members. We hope that this motivates a move towards the equality objectives for 2030. A clear and fundamental societal change is needed, with fair and more consistent institutional policies and framework commitments in the areas of science, medicine, and global health. Gender equality and diversity taskforces are essential to achieve these goals.

Patient summary

We analysed the male/female ratio for participants in annual meetings held by the European Association of Urology and the European Society for Paediatric Urology. From a low level in 2012, the ratio increased to over 30% in 2022, in line with the female membership of the societies. Focus on fair and consistent policies is needed to ensure that women are well represented in medicine.

Contributions of Women to Cardiovascular Science Over Two Decades: Authorship, Leadership, and Mentorship

Background Women remain underrepresented in cardiology. We aimed to assess gender trends in research authorship, authorship in leading roles, mentorship, and research team diversity. Methods and Results We identified "cardiac and cardiovascular systems" journals from 2002 to 2020 using Journal Citation Reports 2019 (Web of Science, Clarivate Analytics). Gender authorship, mentorship, research team diversity, and trends were assessed. Associations between author gender and impact factor, journal region, and cardiology subspecialties were analyzed. Analysis of 396 549 research papers from 122 journals showed the percentage of women authors increased from 16.6% to 24.6% (β=0.38 [95% CI, 0.29-0.46]; P<0.001), whereas the proportion of women first (β=-0.03 [95% CI, -0.06 to 0.004]; P=0.09) or last authors (β=-0.017 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.006]; P=0.15) was unchanged. Compared with men last authors, women last authors were more likely to mentor women first authors and lead more diverse research teams (both P<0.001). Journal impact factor was related to percentage of women authors overall (Spearman's correlation coefficient R_S=0.208 [95% CI, 0.02-0.38]; P=0.03) but not first or last women authors (both P>0.5). Women comprised 18.4%-25.7% of authors in cardiology subspecialties. Journal region and author gender were unrelated (all P>0.4). Conclusions Women's inclusion as authors of cardiology papers increased slightly over the past 2 decades, yet the proportions of women in first and last authorship roles were unchanged. Women are increasingly likely to mentor women first authors and lead diverse research teams. Women last authors are essential to increasing diversity of future independent investigators and inclusive research teams, both of which are associated with innovation and excellence in science.

Impact of racial, ethnic and gender disparities in Cardiology

Literature shows evidence of racial and gender biases in many sub-specialties of medicine including cardiology. Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities exist along the path to cardiology residency, beginning as early as medical school admissions. Approximately 65.62% White, 4.71% Black, 18.06% Asian, and 8.86% Hispanic are cardiologists, while there are a total of 60.1% White, 12.2% Black, 5.6% Asian, and 18.5% Hispanic people in the US in 2019, showing evident underrepresentation. Gender disparities have an inevitable role in the lack of a diverse cardiovascular workforce. According to a recent study, only 13% of practicing cardiologists in the US are women, even though the female population in the US is 50.52% as compared to 49.48%- of men. These disparities led to underrepresented physicians earning less than their similarly qualified counterparts, decreased equity, increased workplace harassment, and also results in patients facing unconscious bias from their physicians leading to deteriorated clinical outcomes. Implications in the field of research include the underrepresentation of minorities and the female population despite the increased burden of cardiovascular disease they face. However, efforts are underway to eradicate the disparities that exist in cardiology. This paper aims to increase awareness regarding the issue and inform future policies with the goal of encouraging underrepresented communities to join the cardiology workforce.

Moving toward gender equity in the cardiology and cardiovascular research workforce in Germany: a report from the German Cardiac Society

Aims

Although the share of women in cardiology in Germany is growing steadily, this does not translate into leadership positions. Medical societies play a crucial role in shaping the national and international medical and scientific environment. The German Cardiac Society (DGK) aims to serve the public discourse on gender-equity by systematic analysis of data on gender representation within the society and in Germany.

Methods and results

We present gender disaggregated data collection of members, official organs, working groups, scientific meetings, as well as awards of the DGK based on anonymized exports from the DGK office as well as on data gathered from the DGK web page. From 2000 to 2020, the overall number of DGK members as well as the share of women increased (12.5% to 25.3%). In 2021, the share of women ranged from 40% to 50% in earlier career stages but was substantially lower at senior levels (23.9% of consulting/attending physicians, 7.1% of physicians-in-chief, 3.4% of directors). The share of women serving in DGK working groups had gained overall proportionality, but nuclei and speaker positions were largely held by men. Boards and project groups were predominantly represented by men as well. At the DGK-led scientific meetings, women contributed more often in junior relative to (invited) senior roles.

Conclusion

Increasing numbers of women in cardiology and in the DGK over the past 20 years did not translate into the respective increase in representation of women in leadership positions. There is an urgent need to identify and, more importantly, to overcome barriers towards gender equity. Transparent presentation of society-related data is the first step for future targeted actions in this regard.

COVID-19-Related Publications by Hospitalists in the United States

Objective To determine the degree to which hospitalists published academic manuscripts related to COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic. Patients and methods The study was a cross-sectional analysis of the author's specialty, defined by byline or professional online biography, from articles related to COVID-19 published between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021. It included the top four internal medicine journals by impact factor: New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association, Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine, and Annals of Internal Medicine. Participants were all United States (US)-based physician authors contributing to COVID-19 publications. Our primary outcome was the percentage of US-based physician authors of COVID-19 articles who were hospitalists. Subgroup analyses characterized author specialty by authorship position (first, middle, last) and article type (research vs. non-research). Results Between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021, the top four US-based medical journals published 870 articles related to COVID-19 of which 712 articles with 1940 US-based physician authors were included. Hospitalists accounted for 4.2% (82) of authorship positions including 4.7% (49/1038) of authorship positions in research articles and 3.7% (33/902) of authorship positions in non-research articles. First, middle, and last authorship positions were held by hospitalists at 3.7% (18/485), 4.4% (45/1034), and 4.5% (19/421) of the time, respectively. Conclusions Despite caring for a large number of patients with COVID-19, hospitalists were rarely involved in disseminating COVID-19 knowledge. Limited authorship by hospitalists could constrain the dissemination of inpatient medicine knowledge, impact patient outcomes, and affect the academic promotion of early-career hospitalists.

Women physicians in cardiovascular magnetic resonance: Past, present, and future

Women's engagement in medicine, and more specifically cardiovascular imaging and cardiovascular MRI (CMR), has undergone a slow evolution over the past several decades. As a result, an increasing number of women have joined the cardiovascular imaging community to contribute their expertise. This collaborative work summarizes the barriers that women in cardiovascular imaging have overcome over the past several years, the positive interventions that have been implemented to better support women in the field of CMR, and the challenges that still remain, with a special emphasis on women physicians.

Gender Differences of Endowed Professorship in Obstetrics and Gynecology Departments at Top Academic Institutions

Background: Gender equity is a critical issue in academic medicine. Whether there is equitable access to the prestige and resources of endowed professorships merits evaluation. We investigated this question in obstetrics and gynecology, a field that focuses on the health of women and in which women are much better represented than other specialties of medicine. Materials and Methods: We compiled a list of the top 25 United States departments of obstetrics and gynecology and contacted department chairs (and used department websites) to obtain lists of faculty and their positions. Scopus, department websites, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORTER were used to collect h-Index, number of publications and citations, graduation year, degrees, gender, and NIH-funding. We conducted a bivariate comparison of endowed professorship attainment by gender using a chi-square test and created a multiple variable regression model. Results: Of the 680 obstetrics and gynecology faculty across 23 departments that had endowed chairs, 64 out of 400 women (16%) and 66 out of 280 men (24%) held endowed chairs (p = 0.01). The multivariable model suggested no independent gender difference in attainment of an endowed chair after adjusting for covariates. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this study is the first to examine gender as a variable in endowed chair allocation in top obstetrics and gynecology academic departments. Our findings suggest a significant gender difference in the allocation of endowed chairs. That difference is driven by gender differences in academic rank, graduation year, publications, and funding. To promote the intraprofessional equity necessary to optimally advance women's health, further research and intervention are necessary.

Wondering If I'd Get There Quicker If I Was a Man: Factors Contributing to Delayed Academic Advancement of Women in Infectious Diseases

Background

Gender inequities in academic advancement persist in many specialties, including Infectious Diseases (ID). Prior studies of advancement disparities have been predominantly quantitative, utilizing large physician databases or surveys. We used qualitative methods to explore ID physicians' experiences and beliefs about causes and ways to mitigate gender inequities in advancement.

Methods

We conducted semistructured focus group discussions with academic ID physicians in the United States at IDWeek 2019 to explore perceived barriers and facilitators to academic advancement. Participants were assigned to focus groups based on their academic rank and gender. We analyzed focus group transcripts using content analysis to summarize emergent themes.

Results

We convened 3 women-only focus groups (1 for instructors/assistant professors, 1 for associate professors, and 1 for full professors) and 1 men-only focus group of full professors (total N = 50). Our analyses identified several major themes on barriers to equitable academic advancement, including (1) interpersonal and institutional gender bias, (2) difficulty balancing the demands of family life with work life, and (3) gender differences in negotiation strategies.

Conclusions

Barriers to gender equity in academic advancement are myriad and enduring and span the professional and personal lives of ID physicians. In addition to swift enactment of policy changes directed at critical issues such as ending workplace harassment and ensuring adequate parental leaves for birth and nonbirth parents, leaders in academic medicine must shine a bright light on biases within the system at large and within themselves to correct these disparities with the urgency required.

Social Media and Cardiovascular Health: Implications for Women

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in adult women in the USA, yet CVD is underrecognized in women. Disparities in care are further pronounced in women of racial/ethnic minority backgrounds. In this review, we discuss the role of social media (SoMe) as a tool to (i) promote women's cardiovascular (CV) health and (ii) address and potentially reduce gaps in care, particularly in general cardiology (targeting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease), cardio-oncology, and cardio-obstetrics. We also briefly discuss women's CV health as a common, although not unique, focus of women in cardiology on SoMe.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies have suggested the utility of social media to help advance subspecialties of cardiology. Leaders within general cardiology, cardio-oncology, and cardio-obstetrics have curated social media strategies to advance their respective fields and call attention to cardiovascular health disparities in female populations and racial/ethnic minorities. In addition to these types of uses, women in cardiology also frequently use SoMe to encourage a career in cardiology and to share experiences, challenges, and resources for support and career advancement as healthcare professionals; men in cardiology and especially those who are allies for sex and racial/ethnic minorities also use SoMe for these means. Herein, we highlight the role and myriad applications of social media in the promotion of women's cardiovascular health. We discuss five primary roles of social media: increasing public awareness, disseminating medical literature in a rapid and accessible fashion, facilitating professional networking, serving as a platform for medical conferences, and empowering patients. These core strategies are discussed through the lens of general cardiology, cardio-oncology, and cardio-obstetrics. We also demonstrate how these applications can be leveraged to increase representation of women in cardiology, also supporting an increased focus on women's cardiovascular health.

Assessment of Medical Industry Compensation to US Physicians by Gender

Importance

It has been well established that female physicians earn less than their male counterparts in all specialties and ranks despite controlling for confounding variables.

Objective

To investigate payments made from highest-grossing medical industry companies to female and male physicians and to assess compensation and engagement disparities based on gender.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, population-based cross-sectional study used data from the Open Payments database for the 5 female and 5 male physicians who received the most financial compensation from each of the 15 highest-grossing medical supply companies in the US from January 2013 to January 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was total general payments received by female and male physicians from medical industry over time and across industries. The secondary outcome was trends in industry payment to female and male physicians from 2013 to 2019.

Results

Among the 1050 payments sampled, 1017 (96.9%) of the 5 highest earners were men and 33 (3.1%) were women. Female physicians were paid a mean (SD) of $41 320 ($88 695), and male physicians were paid a mean (SD) of $1 226 377 ($3 377 957) (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, male gender was significantly associated with higher payment after adjusting for rank, h-index, and specialty (mean [SD], $1 025 413 [$162 578]; P < .001). From 2013 to 2019, the payment gap between female and male physicians increased from $54 343 to $166 778 (P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that male physicians received significantly higher payments from the highest-grossing medical industry companies compared with female physicians. This disparity persisted across all medical specialties and academic ranks. The health care industry gender payment gap continued to increase from 2013 to 2019, with a wider compensation gap in 2019.

Gender Disparities in Presentations at the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) Meetings From 2014 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Participation in surgical society meetings serves as a proxy for academic success and is important for career development. This study aimed to investigate and report the gender breakdown of presenters at recent Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) meetings.

METHODS

Genders of presenters for poster, parallel, plenary, and video sessions at SSO meetings from 2014 through 2019 were collected. These data were broken down to first-last authorship relationships including female-female, female-male, male-female, and male-male. The proportions of female-to-male presenters were compared for each session type. Statistical significance was set at p value lower than 0.05.

RESULTS

From 2014 through 2019, the SSO had 2920 presenters, and 47% were female. Women were listed as first authors more often for the poster session (48%) than for other sessions (parallel, plenary, and video) (p = 0.003). Women also were listed more often as senior authors for the poster session (31%) than for other sessions (p = 0.004). Female senior authors were fewer than male senior authors across all session types. Female first authors had the highest representation in breast (75%), endocrine (48%), and cutaneous (46%) specialties (p < 0.001). The most common combination of first and senior authors was male-male (43%), followed by female-male (28%), female-female (19%), and male-female (10%).

CONCLUSION

Overall, female presentation at SSO is comparable with society demographics, and female first authorship is relatively equal to male first authorship in poster sessions. Whereas female first authorship improved over time, female senior authorship remained relatively flat. Opportunities to improve gender equality in senior authorship positions should be explored.

Scholarly productivity and growth of academic hospital medicine full professors

BACKGROUND

Scholarship remains the principal currency for faculty promotion in academic medicine. Reference points for scholarly growth and productivity at academic medical centers (AMCs) are lacking.

METHODS

We identified hospital medicine full professors (HMFPs) at AMCs ranked in research by US News & World Report. Scopus was used to identify each HMFP's publications, citations, and Hirsch-index (H-index). Publications; citations; and first, middle, and senior author papers were measured in 3-year intervals postresidency. Scholarly productivity was analyzed by quintile based on publications, AMC research ranking, years postresidency, and grant funding.

RESULTS

Data were extracted for 128 HMFPs from 54 AMCs. HMFPs were a mean of 20.5 (SD: 5.4) years postresidency. The median H-index was 7.0 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2.0-16.0); the median number of publications was 15.0 (IQR: 4.0-51.0). Top quintile HMFPs had a median of 175.5 (IQR: 101.5-248.0) publications, whereas fifth quintile HMFPs had a median of 0.0 (IQR: 0.0-1.0) (p < .001). HMFPs on faculty at the top 20 AMCs had a median of 35.5 (IQR: 11.0-108.0) publications, whereas HMFPs in AMCs ranked 81-122 had a median of 3.0 (IQR: 1.0-9.0) (p < .001). Grant-funded HMFPs had a median of 177.0 (IQR: 71.0-278.0) publications, while nongrant-funded HMFPs had a median of 11.0 (IQR: 3.0-25.0) (p < .001). At 3, 6, and 9 years postresidency, HMFPs had a median of 0.0 (IQR: 0.0-1.0), 1.5 (IQR: 0.0-5.0), and 3.5 (IQR: 0.0-11.0) publications. Fellowship training, additional degrees, and top 25 residency programs correlated with the top half of scholarly productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Scholarly productivity among HMFPs varies considerably. At 3, 6, and 9 years postresidency, it is minimal to modest. Grant funding and AMC research rank may establish separate frames of reference for scholarly growth.

How we compare: Society for Academic Emergency Medicine faculty membership demographics

BACKGROUND

The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) has a core value to promote a diverse workforce for patients, providers, and learners. Understanding the organization's membership demographics and how that compares to the academic emergency medicine (EM) workforce is prerequisite to the success of this core value.

METHODS

We obtained 2020 faculty membership data sets from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and SAEM; data included self-reported sex, race and ethnicity, and academic rank (professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor). We employed standardized mean difference (SMD) to quantify difference in proportions between data sets.

RESULTS

We identified 5874 (AAMC) and 2785 (SAEM) faculty. The AAMC (38.3%) and the SAEM (41.3%) had similar proportions of overall female faculty (SMD 0.063) although SAEM (compared to AAMC) had a higher proportion of female full (25.5% vs. 20.5%, SMD 0.121) and assistant (46.5% vs. 41.2%, SMD 0.106) professors. With the exception of Hispanic instructors, SAEM (compared to AAMC) also had higher proportions of Black and Hispanic female faculty at all ranks (SMD ranging from 0.109 to 0.777).

CONCLUSION

SAEM faculty demographics generally reflect that of the academic EM workforce demographics reported in the AAMC database and that overall, the proportions of female, Black, and Hispanic faculty in SAEM are slightly larger than those in the AAMC database. However, faculty who identify as Black or Hispanic in both the AAMC and the SAEM databases (compared to the overall U.S. population) are dramatically underrepresented.

Gender differences in cardiology professionals: A Latin American Survey

BACKGROUND

Gender-based differences among cardiology professionals have been reported in North America and Europe. However, the perspective of Latin American cardiologists remains unexplored.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the study were to analyze the gender gap perspective among cardiologists from Latin America.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study using an online survey directed to Latin American cardiologists from five different cardiology societies. The survey included questions on demographic data, professional development in the field of cardiology, and perceived barriers in clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 240 professionals were surveyed, of which 41.7% were women (100) and 58.3% were men (140). The majority of women tend to work in the subfields of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular imaging. Women were underrepresented as heads of departments, earn less, and report less work satisfaction than men. The barriers that female cardiologists face at their workplace include labor discrimination, sexual harassment, family-related concerns, and lack of career development.

CONCLUSIONS

The survey points toward the prevalence of a gender gap among cardiologists in Latin America, which is primarily driven by labor discrimination, sexual harassment, family-related concerns, and lack of career development among female cardiologists. Actions aimed at addressing this issue should be considered by different parties.

Women in Procedural Leadership Roles in Cardiology: The Women In Local Leadership (WILL) Observational Study

BACKGROUND

While 50% of U.S. medical students are women, this fails to translate to cardiology: gender disparities are striking in interventional cardiology (IC) and electrophysiology (EP) and in leadership. Left atrial appendage closure with the WATCHMAN device, as a novel procedure, is a lens into inequities.

OBJECTIVE

To identify characteristics and prevalence of women: 1) as early WATCHMAN implanters, and 2) in related leadership.

METHODS

Data was collected on WATCHMAN implanters and hospitals from January 2017-December 2018. The gender of physicians in leadership positions was identified via survey: Director of IC and EP, and Chief of Cardiology. Firth's logistic model controlling for covariates modeled the rare event of a woman implanter.

RESULTS

Data obtained on 100% of cohort. Men comprised 97% of implanters (860/886). No difference in subspecialty or implants by gender. There were 414 hospitals performing WATCHMAN: 24% academic, 97% urban, and most medium/large sized (94%). EP made up 61% of implanters. Only 4.8% of hospitals had women in selected leadership roles. Women represented <1% of Directors of IC and only 2.6% of both Directors of EP and Chiefs of Cardiology. Hospitals with a woman in leadership had four times greater odds of a woman implanter (OR=4.24, 95% CI 1.16-15.41, p=0.028).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Women are underrepresented in cardiology procedural subspecialties in use of novel technology and key leadership roles. There was a greater odds of women early implanters of WATCHMAN if a woman led locally. Increasing women in leadership may improve gender diversity though visibility of role models.

Female Physicians Earn An Estimated $2 Million Less Than Male Physicians Over A Simulated 40-Year Career

Differences in income between male and female academic physicians are well known, but differences for community physicians and career differences in income have not been quantified. We used earnings data from 80,342 full-time US physicians to estimate career differences in income between men and women. The differences in annual income between male and female physicians that we observed in our simulations increased most rapidly during the initial years of practice. Over the course of a simulated forty-year career, male physicians earned an average adjusted gross income of $8,307,327 compared with an average of $6,263,446 for female physicians-an absolute adjusted difference of $2,043,881 and relative difference of 24.6 percent. Gender differences in career earnings were largest for surgical specialists ($2.5 million difference), followed by nonsurgical specialists ($1.6 million difference) and primary care physicians ($0.9 million difference). These findings imply that over the course of a career, female US physicians were estimated to earn, on average, more than $2 million less than male US physicians after adjustment for factors that may otherwise explain observed differences in income, such as hours worked, clinical revenue, practice type, and specialty.

Social Media as a Tool to Advance Women in Cardiology: Paving the Way for Gender Equality and Diversity

Although the number of women in the field of medicine continues to rise, the discrimination against women and the gender inequity in both leadership roles and salary remains persistent. The gender divide is particularly prominent in male-dominated specialties, such as cardiology. Social media help foster global connections and disseminate information quickly and worldwide. The rise of social media has influenced how female physicians communicate and has shown its benefits particularly within the field of cardiology. Virtual platforms are important avenues where female physicians have united for greater representation of gender issues and advocacy efforts. Social media further amplify gender-equality activism by facilitating the conversations surrounding gender equity and proposing solutions to self-identified issues by the virtual community of female physicians and their allies. In this review, we discuss the role of social media as tools for advancing women in the field of cardiology and fostering gender equality and diversity.

Temporal Trends and Clinical Trial Characteristics Associated With the Inclusion of Women in Heart Failure Trial Steering Committees: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Trial steering committees (TSCs) steer the conduct of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We examined the gender composition of TSCs in impactful heart failure RCTs and explored whether trial leadership by a woman was independently associated with the inclusion of women in TSCs.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for heart failure RCTs published in journals with impact factor ≥10 between January 2000 and May 2019. We used the Jonckheere-Terpstra test to assess temporal trends and multivariable logistic regression to explore trial characteristics associated with TSC inclusion of women.

RESULTS

Of 403 RCTs that met inclusion criteria, 127 (31.5%) reported having a TSC but 20 of these (15.7%) did not identify members. Among 107 TSCs that listed members, 56 (52.3%) included women and 6 of these (10.7%) restricted women members to the RCT leaders. Of 1213 TSC members, 11.1% (95% CI, 9.4%-13.0%) were women, with no change in temporal trends (P=0.55). Women had greater odds of TSC inclusion in RCTs led by women (adjusted odds ratio, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.05-8.72], P=0.042); this association was nonsignificant when analysis excluded TSCs that restricted women to the RCT leaders (adjusted odds ratio 1.46 [95% CI, 0.43-4.91], P=0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Women were included in 52.3% of TSCs and represented 11.1% of TSC members in 107 heart failure RCTs, with no change in trends since 2000. RCTs led by women had higher adjusted odds of including women in TSCs, partly due to the self-inclusion of RCT leaders in TSCs.

Scholarly Productivity and Rank in Academic Hospital Medicine

Despite the rapid growth of academic hospital medicine, scholarly productivity remains poorly characterized. In this cross-sectional study, distribution of academic rank and scholarly output of academic hospital medicine faculty are described. We extracted data for 1,554 hospitalists on faculty at the top 25 internal medicine residency programs. Only 11.7% of faculty had reached associate (9.0%) or full professor (2.7%). The median number of publications was 0.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.0-4.0), with 51.4% without a single publication. Faculty 6 to 10 years post residency had a median of 1.0 (IQR, 0.0-4.0) publication, with 46.8% of these faculty without a publication. Among men, 54.3% had published at least one manuscript, compared to 42.7% of women (P < .0001). Predictors of promotion included H-index, number of years post residency graduation, completion of chief residency, and graduation from a top 25 medical school. Promotion remains uncommon in academic hospital medicine, which may be partially due to low rates of scholarly productivity.

Ending Gender Inequality in Cardiovascular Clinical Trial Leadership: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Women are under-represented as leaders of cardiovascular randomized controlled trials, representing 1 in 10 lead authors of cardiovascular trials published in high-impact journals. Although the proportion of cardiovascular specialists who are women has increased in recent years, the proportion of cardiovascular clinical trialists who are women has not. This gap, underpinned by systemic sexism, has not been adequately addressed. The benefits of diverse randomized controlled trial leadership extend to patients and professionals. In this position statement, we present strategies adopted by some organizations to end gender inequality in research leadership. We offer an actionable roadmap for early-career researchers, scientists, academic institutions, professional societies, trial sponsors, and journals to follow, with the goal of harnessing the strength of women and under-represented groups as research leaders and facilitating a just culture in the cardiovascular clinical trial enterprise.

Attaining full professor: Women's and men's experiences in medical education

INTRODUCTION

The underrepresentation of women among senior faculty members in medical education is a longstanding problem. The purpose of this international qualitative investigation was to explore women and men's experiences of attaining full professorship and to investigate why women remain underrepresented among the senior faculty ranks.

METHODS

Conducted within a social constructionist orientation, our qualitative study employed narrative analysis. Two female and two male participants working in medical education were recruited from five nations: Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States. All participants held an MD or PhD. During telephone interviews, participants narrated the story of their careers. The five faculty members on the research team were also interviewed. Their narratives were included in analysis, rendering their experiences equal to those of the participants.

RESULTS

A total of 24 full professors working in medical education were interviewed (n = 15 females and n = 9 males). While some aspects were present across all narratives (ie personal events, career milestones and facilitating and/or impeding factors), participants' experience of those aspects differed by gender. Men did not narrate fatherhood as a role navigated professionally, but women narrated motherhood as intimately connected to their professional roles. Both men and women narrated career success in terms of hard work and overcoming obstacles; however, male participants described promotion as inevitable, whereas women narrated promotion as a tenuous navigation of social structures towards uncertain outcomes. Female and male participants encountered facilitators and inhibitors throughout their careers but described acting on those experiences differently within the cultural contexts they faced.

DISCUSSION

Our data suggest that female and male participants had different experiences of the work involved in achieving full professor status. Understanding these gendered experiences and their impact on career progression is an important advancement for better understanding what leads to the underrepresentation of women among senior faculty members in medical education.

Longitudinal analyses of gender differences in first authorship publications related to COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

Concerns have been raised that the COVID-19 pandemic has shifted research productivity to the disadvantage of women in academia, particularly in early career stages. In this study, we aimed to assess the pandemic's effect on women's COVID-19-related publishing over the first year of the pandemic.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We compared the gender distribution of first authorships for 42 898 publications on COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 31 January 2021 to 483 232 publications appearing in the same journals during the same period the year prior. We found that the gender gap-the percentage of articles on which men versus women were first authors-widened by 14 percentage points during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite many pertinent research fields showing near equal proportions of men and women first authors publishing in the same fields before the pandemic. Longitudinal analyses revealed that the significant initial expansions of the gender gap began to trend backwards to expected values over time in many fields. As women may have been differentially affected depending on their geography, we also assessed the gender distribution of first authorships grouped by countries and geographical areas. While we observed a significant reduction of the shares of women first authors in almost all countries, longitudinal analyses confirmed a resolving trend over time.

CONCLUSION

The reduction in women's COVID-19-related research output appears particularly concerning as many disciplines informing the response to the pandemic had near equal gender shares of first authorship in the year prior to the pandemic. The acute productivity drain with the onset of the pandemic magnifies deep-rooted obstacles on the way to gender equity in scientific contribution.

Representation of Women Physicians in Heart Failure Clinical Practice

Women have been integral in the development of advanced heart failure (HF) and transplantation as a clinical subspecialty of cardiovascular medicine. However, women remain underrepresented in leadership positions, senior academic ranks and as researchers in HF. In recent years, there have been accelerating efforts to examine sex differences in the clinical and research domains of HF. The purpose of this review is to discuss the representation of women in HF training programmes and clinical practice, the demographics of HF clinicians compared with other cardiology subspecialties, the persistent sex disparities in HF practice and research environments and potential strategies to promote equity and inclusion for women in the field.

Peering Through the Glass Ceiling: A Mixed Methods Study of Faculty Perceptions of Gender Barriers to Academic Advancement in Infectious Diseases

BACKGROUND

The drivers of the gap in advancement between men and women faculty in academic Infectious Diseases (ID) remain poorly understood. This study sought to identify key barriers to academic advancement among faculty in ID and offer policy suggestions to narrow this gap.

METHODS

During the 2019 IDWeek, we conducted focus groups with women faculty members at all ranks and men Full Professors, then we administered a brief survey regarding work-related barriers to advancement to the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) membership. We report themes from the 4 focus group discussions that are most closely linked to policy changes and descriptive analyses of the complementary survey domains.

RESULTS

Policy change suggestions fell into 3 major categories: (1) Policy changes for IDSA to implement; (2) Future IDWeek Program Recommendations; and (3) Policy Changes for IDSA to Endorse as Best Practices for ID Divisions. Among 790 faculty respondents, fewer women reported that their institutional promotion process was transparent and women Full Professors were significantly more likely to have been sponsored.

CONCLUSIONS

Sponsorship and informed advising about institutional promotions tracks may help to narrow the advancement gap. The Infectious Disease Society of America should consider ambitious policy changes within the society and setting expectations for best practices among ID divisions across the United States.

Research Conducted in Women Was Deemed More Impactful but Less Publishable than the Same Research Conducted in Men

Background: Female scientists, who are more likely than their male counterparts to study women and report findings by sex/gender, fare worse in the article peer review process. It is unknown whether the gender of research participants influences the recommendation to publish an article describing the study. Materials and Methods: Reviewers were randomly assigned to evaluate one of three versions of an article abstract describing a clinical study conducted in men, women, or individuals. Reviewers assessed the study's scientific rigor, its level of contribution to medical science, and whether they would recommend publishing the full article. Responses were analyzed with logistic regression controlling for reviewer background variables, including sex and experience level. Results: There was no significant difference in perceived research rigor by abstract condition; contribution to medical science was perceived to be greater for research conducted in women than men (odds ratio = 1.7; p = 0.030). Nevertheless, reviewers were almost twice as likely to recommend publication for research conducted in men than the same research conducted in women (predicted probability 0.606 vs. 0.322; p = 0.000). Conclusions: These results are consistent with abundant data from multiple sources showing a lower societal value placed on women than men. Because female investigators are more likely than male investigators to study women, our findings suggest a previously unrecognized bias that could contribute to gender asymmetries in the publication outcomes of peer review. This pro-male publication bias could be an additional barrier to leadership attainment for women in academic medicine and the advancement of women's health.

Gender equity within medical specialties of Australia and New Zealand: cardiology's outlier status

BACKGROUND

Gender disparity remains a prominent medical workforce issue, extending beyond surgical specialties with low proportions of female doctors.

AIMS

To examine female representation within Australia and New Zealand (NZ) among physician specialties and certain comparator surgical specialties with a focus on cardiology as an outlier of workforce gender equality.

METHODS

Data of practising medical specialists, new consultants and trainees were sought from the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, the Medical Council of NZ and the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (2015-2017). The stratified data pertaining to interventional cardiologists were obtained through direct contact with individual hospitals (from 2017 to 2018) and derived from state-based cardiac registries.

RESULTS

In Australia and NZ, there were fewer female practising adult medicine physician consultants (n = 8956, 32%, P < 0.001), with gender disparities seen across most physician specialties. Cardiology (15%) was the only physician specialty with <20% representation; gastroenterology (23%), neurology (27%) and respiratory medicine (29%) had <30% female representation at the consultant level. The rates of cardiology (15%) and interventional cardiology (5%) were similar to general surgery (15%) and orthopaedics (4%). Although more than half of physician trainees are female, and most physician specialties are approaching or have equal gender ratios at the trainee level, cardiology (23%) and interventional cardiology (9%) remain significantly underrepresented.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiology is the only physician specialty with <20% female consultants, and this disparity is reflected throughout every stage of the cardiology training programme. Increased awareness and proactive strategies are needed to improve gender disparity within this underrepresented medical specialty.

Factors that Influence Work Family Conflict for Women Faculty

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Purpose: This study examined the interaction between work role overload, work-to-family conflict, and departmental/division culture conducive to women's academic success. Methods: All women assistant and associate professors eligible for promotion from the Departments of Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Pediatrics were invited to complete a validated web-based survey that measured work-to-family conflict, work hours, work role overload, and culture conducive to women's academic success ( Westring et al., 2012). Results: With 88 survey respondents, high work role overload was associated with increased levels of work-to-family conflict while those who reported a higher culture conducive to women's academic success reported less work-to-family conflict. Culture conducive to women's academic success did not moderate the impact of work demand on work-to-family conflict. Conclusions: While departmental/division culture was important, it was not sufficient to completely mitigate work-to-family conflict. Work demand appears to impact work-to-family conflict related to strain, in which women report being too stressed by work to focus on their family and their own health and wellness. Employers can greatly impact work culture by reducing the strain of work demands that interfere with women pursuing promotion, increase burnout, and contribute to women faculty deciding to work part-time.

Gender and career in cardiology-a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The proportion of women as leading physicians in cardiology in university medicine has stagnated and the share of women in senior positions in cardiology is low compared with other medical specialist fields. Here, we analyze the typical barriers for women as doctors in cardiology and point to issues that make the discipline less attractive for both genders.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, a standardized online questionnaire was sent to 3873 members of the German Cardiac Society (DGK). Answers from 567 (278 women, 289 men) were analyzed, using comparisons between groups, correlation analyses, and tests of normal distribution.

RESULTS

For 47.4% of respondents (52.0%, of women; 42.8%, of men; p = 0.049), training had lasted longer than anticipated. Average monthly gross income (full-time work) differed significantly between women and men as specialists (p = 0.004) and assistant doctors (p = 0.030). Of women, 32.1% had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace. The main arguments against a career in university medicine were an extremely competitive working climate (66.7% of women, 63.2% of men), lack of work-life balance (66.7% women, 55.3% men), and excessive workload (57.8% women, 62.5% men). As strategies to increase job attractiveness, both mentioned measures to improve the work-life balance, and the flexibility of working times and improved financial provision. Women asked for gender balance at management level (76.3% vs. 32.9% of men) and opportunities for sharing management tasks (82.4% vs. 57.9%). Flatter hierarchies were requested by more men (67.1 vs. 54.8%).

CONCLUSION

Further development of the work culture in cardiology seems necessary. In order to increase the attractiveness of the field overall and to provide equal opportunities in cardiology, more targeted support should be provided to young doctors and more flexibility introduced into work.

Gender Equity Imbalance in Cardiology Scientific Sessions in the Americas

Women remain largely under-represented in cardiology worldwide. This is especially reflected in scientific sessions where panelists have a male preponderant representation. The amount of gender equity in cardiology during scientific activities in the American continent is unknown. The objective was to compare gender distribution of invited panelists in cardiology scientific sessions across the Americas during the period 2019-2020. A retrospective analysis of the cardiology scientific sessions held in North, Central, and South America was conducted. Sessions published on the official site and social networks of the national cardiology societies from January 1, 2019 to August 10, 2020 were included. Gender distribution and all-male panels were compared according to geographic regions, year, roles in the panel, and the main topics of the session. Seven hundred fifty-two scientific sessions were analyzed, with 3786 participants. The median participation of women was 20% (IQR 0%-37.5%). Specifically, the statistics reflected a female participation of 25% (IQR 0%-43.6%) in North America, 12.5% (IQR 0%-43%) in Central America and 10% (IQR 0%-33.3%) in South America (P < 0.0001). Women participation in the panels was different according to the main topic of the session (P < 0.0001), with higher proportions in topics such as cardiovascular diseases in women, congenital heart disease and cardio oncology. The frequency of all-male panels was 36.8% (CI95% 33.3-40.1), and it increased over time (2019: 30.9% vs 2020: 40.3%; P = 0.012). There is gender inequity in cardiology scientific sessions held in different regions of the Americas, with low participation of women especially in interventionist panels and leadership roles.

Sex Differences in Achievement and Faculty Rank in Academic Infectious Diseases

BACKGROUND

This study assesses differences in faculty rank between female and male infectious diseases (ID) faculty with academic appointments at US medical schools.

METHODS

We analyzed a complete database of US physicians with medical school faculty appointments in 2014. This database consists of a linkage between the American Association of Medical Colleges faculty roster and a physician database from Doximity, and includes physician age, sex, years since residency completion, publications, National Institutes of Health grants, and registered clinical trials for all academic physicians by specialty. We used multivariable logistic regression models with medical school-specific fixed effects to assess sex differences in full professorship by specialty and the relationship between these factors and achieving the rank of full professor within ID. We compared this adjusted difference in ID to that of peer subspecialties.

RESULTS

Among a total of 2016 academic ID physicians, there were 742 (37%) women who together accounted for 48.1% of assistant professors, 39.7% of associate professors, and 19.2% of full professors. Women faculty had fewer total (16.3 vs 28.3, P < .001) and first/last author publications (9.8 vs 20.4, P < .001). In adjusted models, the rate of full professorship (vs assistant or associate) among female compared to male ID physicians was large and significant (absolute adjusted difference, -8.0% [95% confidence interval, -11.9% to -4.1%]). This difference was greater in ID than in cardiology.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant sex differences in achieving the rank of full professor exist in academic ID, after adjustment for multiple factors known to influence these outcomes. Greater efforts should be made to address equity in academic ID.