Search

Background Women continue to be underrepresented in cardiology and even more so in leadership positions. We evaluated the trends and gender differences in the guideline writing groups of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA), Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS), and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines from 2006 to 2020. Methods and Results We extracted all guidelines authors from 2006 to 2020, assessed their gender from publicly available profiles, and compared differences based on subspecialties and specific societies. Stratified and trend analyses were performed using χ 2 and average annual percentage change/average 5 year percentage change. A total of 80 ACC/AHA (1288 authors [28% women]), 64 CCS (988 authors [26% women]), and 59 ESC (1157 authors [16% women]) guidelines were analyzed. A significant increase in inclusion of women was seen in ACC/AHA (12.6% [2006] to 42.6% [2020]; average annual percentage change, 6.6% [2.3% to 11.1%]; P =0.005) and ESC (7.1% [2006] to 25.8% [2020]; average annual percentage change, 6.6% [0.2% to 13.5%]; P =0.04), but the trend remained similar in CCS (20.6% [2006] to 36.3% [2020]; average annual percentage change, -0.1% (-3.7% to 3.5%); P =0.94), guideline authors. More women were coauthors in the ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines when women were chairs of guidelines. There was a persistent disparity of women among guideline authors for general cardiology and all subspecialties, except for pediatric cardiology and heart failure guidelines. The appointment of women authors as a chair was significantly low in all societies (22.4% [ACC/AHA], 16.9% [CCS], and 7.2% [ESC]; P =0.008). Conclusions There is a significant disparity in the inclusion of women on all national guideline committees, in addition to serving as a chair of cardiology guidelines. Further advocacy is required to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion in our cardiology guidelines globally.

Background Social media is an effective channel for the advancement of women physicians; however, its use by women in cardiology has not been systematically studied. Our study seeks to characterize the current Women in Cardiology Twitter network. Methods and Results Six women-specific cardiology Twitter hashtags were analyzed: #ACCWIC (American College of Cardiology Women in Cardiology), #AHAWIC (American Heart Association Women in Cardiology), #ilooklikeacardiologist, #SCAIWIN (Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Women in Innovations), #WomeninCardiology, and #WomeninEP (Women in Electrophysiology). Twitter data from 2016 to 2019 were obtained from Symplur Signals. Quantitative and descriptive content analyses were performed. The Women in Cardiology Twitter network generated 48 236 tweets, 266 180 903 impressions, and 12 485 users. Tweets increased by 706% (from 2083 to 16 780), impressions by 207% (from 26 755 476 to 82 080 472), and users by 440% (from 796 to 4300), including a 471% user increase internationally. The network generated 6530 (13%) original tweets and 43 103 (86%) amplification tweets. Most original and amplification tweets were authored by women (81% and 62%, respectively) and women physicians (76% and 52%, respectively), with an increase in original and amplification tweets authored by academic women physicians (98% and 109%, respectively) and trainees (390% and 249%, respectively) over time. Community building, professional development, and gender advocacy were the most common tweet contents over the study period. Community building was the most common tweet category for #ACCWIC, #AHAWIC, #ilooklikeacardiologist, #SCAIWIN, and #WomeninCardiology, whereas professional development was most common for #WomeninEP. Conclusions The Women in Cardiology Twitter network has grown immensely from 2016 to 2019, with women physicians as the driving contributors. This network has become an important channel for community building, professional development, and gender advocacy discussions in an effort to advance women in cardiology.