Search

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.

Objective: The implementation of integrated vascular surgery training programs was recently shown to be associated with an increase in women entering the field. However, whether this has precipitated a subsequent increase in the active participation of women in academic vascular societies remains unclear. We sought to examine the trends of academic inclusion of women vascular surgeons and surgical trainees over the past 15 years at the Southern Association for Vascular Surgery (SAVS)., Methods: Scientific programs for annual meetings of the SAVS, and program matriculation statistics from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, were reviewed for the period of 2006 to 2020. Yearly rates and 3-year averages of conference and society participation and vascular surgery training program matriculation rates were calculated and compared with proportion testing. Spearman correlation testing was used to compare trends, with ρ ≥0.600 defined as a strong correlation., Results: Examining 3-year means, the average number of women authors per SAVS abstract increased from 0.78 to 1.42 over the course of the study period (P < .001), and the overall rate of women authors steadily increased from 12.8% to 21.5% (P < .001). Although this remains less than the proportion of women matriculating into vascular surgery programs in 2019 (29.3%; P = .007), the upward trend of women entering vascular surgery overall, and particularly vascular surgery fellowship, strongly correlates with the average number of women authors on abstracts at SAVS (ρ = 0.709 and ρ = 0.737, respectively). The percentage of women presenting authors increased from 9.7% to 28.4% (P = .004), but there was no increase in the percentage of women senior authors (10.1% to 9.6%; P = .92). In the 15-year period, only one abstract of 347 (0.3%) had full authorship by women vs 35.1% with full authorship by men (P < .001). Although the increase of women matriculating into vascular surgery programs over the study period did not correlate with the increase of women in senior leadership positions (ρ < 0.600), there was an increase in the number of women in committee chair positions (0.0% to 25.9%; P = .005), which correlated strongly with increasing society membership (ρ = 0.716). Additionally, there was an increase in women holding executive council positions from 0% to 10.0% (P = .08), although this was not statistically significant., Conclusions: Participation of women authoring and presenting papers at the SAVS has increased over the past 15 years at a rate that strongly correlates with the increasing rate of women entering vascular surgery training programs. It is important that society leadership opportunities continue to parallel this trend as we seek to further improve diversity in vascular surgery., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The demographics of plastic surgeons and plastic surgery trainees are changing, reflecting an increase in the diversity of medical school graduates. The authors investigated the gender diversity of speakers at several plastic surgery conferences and evaluated temporal trends over a 10-year period., Methods: The following societies' conferences and years were included based on the conference agendas available for review: American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Plastic Surgery Research Council, American Association of Plastic Surgeons, Northeastern Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery. Differences in the average amount of time spoken were analyzed using an independent one-tailed t test., Results: The number of female speakers and the time allotted to speak increased for all conferences. There was not a consistent difference in the amount of time individual men and women were allotted to speak. Across the five conferences, there was no consistent relationship found between years since board certification and female participation in conference. Gender diversity among speakers at plastic surgery conferences has not kept pace with the increase in female plastic surgery trainees because those who are selected to speak are overwhelmingly men. The hypothesis that a paucity of female speakers reflects the relatively shorter duration of career experience of female plastic surgeons was not supported by these findings., Conclusion: It is imperative that conferences increase the participation of women and strive toward more accurately reflecting the burgeoning role that female surgeons have in the field at present and will have in the future., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Objective: To identify changes in current practice patterns, salaries, and satisfaction by gender and by years in practice among board-certified reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) subspecialists in the United States., Design: Cross-sectional web-based survey including 37 questions conducted by the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility., Setting: Not applicable., Patient(s): None., Intervention(s): None., Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome measures were total compensation and practice patterns compared by gender and the type of practice. The secondary outcomes included demographics, the number of in vitro fertilization cycles, surgeries performed, and the morale of survey respondents., Result(s): There were 370 respondents (48.4% women and 51.4% men). Compared with a similar survey conducted 6 years earlier, a 27% increase in the number of female respondents was observed in this survey. There was a marginally significant trend toward lower compensation for female than male REI subspecialists (17% lower, $472,807 vs. $571,969). The gap was seen for responders with ≥10 years' experience, which is also when there was the largest gap between private and academic practice (mean $820,997 vs, $391,600). Most (77%) felt positively about the current state of the reproductive endocrinology field, and >90% would choose the subspecialty again., Conclusion(s): There has been a substantial increase in the number of recent female REI subspecialists showing less disparity in compensation, and the gap appears to be closing. There is an increasing gap in compensation between private and academic practices with ≥5 years of experience. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility remains a high morale specialty., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Prior work suggests women surgical role models attract more female medical students into surgical training. We investigate recent trends of women in surgical society leadership and national conference moderator and plenary speaker roles., Methods: Gender distribution was surveyed at 15 major surgical societies and 14 conferences from 2014 to 2018 using publicly reported data. Roles were categorized as leadership (executive council), moderator, or plenary speaker. Data were cross-checked from online profiles and by contacting societies. Logistic regression with Huber-White clustering by society was utilized to evaluate proportions of women in each role over time and determine associations between the proportion of women in executive leadership, and scientific session moderators and plenary speakers., Results: The proportion of leadership positions held by women increased slightly from 2014 to 2018 (20.6%-26.6%, P = 0.23), as did the proportion of moderators (26.2%-30.6%, P = 0.027) and plenary speakers (26.2%-30.9%, P = 0.058). The proportion of women in each role varied significantly across societies (all P < 0.001): leaders (range 0.0%-52.0%), moderators (12.5%-58.8%), and plenary speakers (11.3%-60.0%). Three patterns of change were observed: eight societies (53.3%) demonstrated increases in representation of women over time, four societies (26.6%) showed stable moderate-to-good gender balance, and three societies (20.0%) had consistent underrepresentation of women., Conclusion: There is significant variability in the representation of women at the leadership level of national surgical societies and participating at national surgical conferences as moderators and plenary speakers. Over the past 5 years some societies have achieved advances in gender equity, but many societies still have substantial room for improvement., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Women continue to be underrepresented in medicine, especially in senior leadership positions, and they experience challenges related to gender bias and sexual harassment. Women who are members of multiple groups that experience marginalization, including, for example, women who are American Indian, Alaskan native, indigenous, Black, or Hispanic, face a compounded challenge. In this article, we explore how institutions and professional organizations in medicine can use metrics to better understand the structural disparities that create and promote gender inequity in the work environment and how to employ these metrics to track progress in narrowing these gaps. Examples in health care (clinical medicine, scientific organizations, scientific publishing), business, and law are used to illustrate how impactful metrics can promote accountability when coupled with transparent reporting., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Dr Spector is cofounder and holds equity in the I-PASS Patient Safety Institute and is the executive director of Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine. Drs Bhembe, Cansino, and Khanna participated and Dr Spector served on the Steering Committee of inaugural Women’s Wellness Through Equity and Leadership program. The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interests to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Objective: Medical schools and surgical residencies have seen an increase in the proportion of female matriculants, with 30% of current vascular surgery trainees being women over the past decade. There is widespread focus on increasing diversity in medicine and surgery in an effort to provide optimal quality of patient care and the advancement of science. The presence of gender diversity and opportunities to identify with women in leadership positions positively correlates with women choosing to enter traditionally male-dominated fields. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the representation of women in regional and national vascular surgical societies over the last 20 years., Methods: A retrospective review of the meeting programs of vascular surgery societies was performed. Data were collected on abstract presenters, moderators, committee members and chairs, and officers (president, president-elect, vice president, secretary, and treasurer). The data were divided into early (1999-2009) and late (2010-2019) time periods., Results: Five regional and five national societies' data were analyzed, including 139 meetings. The mean percentage of female abstract presenters increased significantly from 10.9% in the early period to 20.6% in the late period (P < .001). Female senior authors increased slightly from 8.7% to 11.5%, but this change was not statistically significant (P = .22). Female meeting moderators increased significantly from 7.8% to 17.2% (P < .001), as well as female committee members increased from 10.9% to 20.3% (P = .003). Female committee chairs increased slightly from 10.9% to 16.9%, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .13). Female society officers increased considerably from 6.4% to 14.8%. (P = .002). Significant variation was noted between societies, with five societies (three regional and two national) having less than 10% women at the officer level in 2019. There was a wide variation noted between societies in the percentage of female abstract presenters (range, 7.6%-34.9%), senior authors (3.9%-17.9%), and meeting moderators (5.4%-40.7%)., Conclusions: Over the past two decades, there has been a significant increase in the representation of women in vascular surgery societies among those presenting scientific work, serving as meeting moderators, and serving as committee members. However, the representation of women among committee chairs, senior authors, and society leadership has not kept up pace with the increase noted at other levels. Efforts to recruit women into the field of vascular surgery as well as to support the professional development of female vascular surgeons are facilitated by the presence of women in leadership roles. Increasing the representation of women in vascular society leadership positions may be a key strategy in promoting gender diversity in the vascular surgery field., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The presence of women in decision-making positions, such as on editorial committees of biomedical journals, is not the same as that of men. This paper analyzes the gender composition of editorial committees (EBMs) and editors-in-chief (ECs) positions of pediatric journals., Methods: The gender of EBMs and ECs of 125 journals classified in the pediatrics area of the Journal Citation Report (JCR) was analyzed. The following indicators were calculated: gender distribution of ECs and EBMs by journal, publisher, subject speciality, country, quartile of the journal in JCR and country of affiliation of the members., Results: The total number of EBMs was 4242. The distribution by sex of the ECs was 19.44% women and 80.56% men, while that of the EBMs were 33.05% women and 66.95% men. Twenty journals exhibited a greater representation of women than of men, and in four there was parity. Journals with greater participation of women specialized in nursing and physical therapy and were related to nutrition (lactation and breastfeeding)., Conclusions: Only one-fifth of ECs and one-third of EBMs are females. Women's participation is higher in journals related to nursing, physical and occupational therapy, and nutrition. The United States has the highest number of EBMs, followed by the European Union., Impact: Only one-fifth of Editors-in-chief in pediatrics journals are female. Only one-third of Editorial Board Members in pediatrics journals are female. Women's participation is higher in editorials committees in pediatrics journals related to nursing, physical and occupational therapy, and nutrition. Medical and pediatric associations and societies must work together to eliminate the disparities that exist between women and men. Achieving gender equity and empowering all women is one of the World Health Organization's Sustainable Development Goals., (© 2020. International Pediatric Research Foundation, Inc.)

Background: Society awards provide visibility and national recognition for physicians. Several studies have found that women were underrepresented as award recipients when compared with subspecialty workforce data. However, to our knowledge no studies have examined the gender distribution of award recipients in orthopaedic societies. Orthopaedic surgery remains among the least gender-diverse specialties in medicine. Particularly in academic practice, the increasing paucity of women with progressive rank may reflect unequal access to the currency for promotion, including national reputation and visibility. Therefore, information on orthopaedic awarding practices may help to identify and address challenges associated with recruiting, retaining, and promoting women in orthopaedics., Questions/purposes: (1) Since the year 2000, have women orthopaedic surgeons received awards in proportion to their society membership? (2) Are the awards granted to women equally distributed across the categories of leadership, humanitarianism, education, scientific investigation, resident/fellow scientific investigation, and diversity? (3) Does the gender distribution of award recipients differ for awards bestowed through a blinded process versus an unblinded process?, Methods: Eighteen national, clinically focused orthopaedic societies in the United States were included. These societies offer a combined total of 69 awards; each award was studied from its earliest record through December 2018, resulting in a study period from 1973 to 2018. Each society provided the gender demographics of their membership in 2018. The proportion of women award recipients from 2000 to 2018 was compared with the proportion of women members in 2018 for each society. Awards were also categorized based on the six types of accomplishment they recognized (leadership, humanitarianism, education, scientific investigation, resident/fellow scientific investigation, and diversity), and whether they were granted through a blinded or unblinded selection process. Chi-square tests were used to compare the proportion of women receiving awards in various categories, and to compare the proportion of women who received awards through blinded selection processes versus unblinded selection processes., Results: From 2000 to 2018, women received 8% (61 of 794) of all awards and represented 9% (5359 of 59,597) of all society members. Two societies had an underrepresentation of women award recipients compared with their society membership. We found that women were not represented proportionally across award categories. Women were more likely to receive a diversity award than a leadership award (odds ratio 12.0 [95% CI 3.1 to 45.7]; p < 0.001), and also more likely to receive an education award than a leadership award (OR 4.1 [95% CI 1.3 to 12.7]). From 1973 to 2018, 17 of 22 the leadership awards offered by societies have never been granted to a woman. Finally, women were more likely to receive awards bestowed through a blinded process than an unblinded process. Women earned 11% (30 of 285) of awards bestowed through a blinded award process and 6% (31 of 509) of awards bestowed through an unblinded award process (OR 1.8 [95% CI 1.1 to 3.1]; p = 0.03)., Conclusion: The percent of women award recipients was generally proportional to membership overall and in most societies. However, on a national workforce level, the proportion of women award recipients is lower than the proportion of women in academic orthopaedics, which has been reported by others to be about 13%, suggesting that women in academic orthopaedics may be underrepresented as award recipients. Additionally, women were less likely to receive leadership awards than awards of other types, which suggests that women are not being recognized as leaders in orthopaedics. Women were also more likely to receive awards granted through unblinded processes, which raises concern that there may be implicit bias in orthopaedic awarding practices., Clinical Relevance: We encourage societies to examine the inclusiveness of their awards selection processes and to track the demographic information of award recipients over time to measure progress toward equal representation. Creating standardized award criteria, including women on selection committees, requiring the consideration of diverse nominees, and implicit bias training for selection committees may help to reduce bias in awarding practices., Competing Interests: Each author certifies that neither he nor she, nor any members of his or her immediate family, has funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Background: The most recent demographic data reveal that only 6.5% of practicing orthopaedic surgeons are women, and as far as we know, only two women have held chair positions in academic orthopaedic programs in the United States. Furthermore, orthopaedic surgery is the least gender-diverse speciality recognized by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. The factors that contribute to the lack of gender diversity in orthopaedics remain ill-defined. A lag in publication productivity may be a barrier to career advancement for women orthopaedic surgeons, but this has not been well studied., Questions/purposes: (1) What is the proportion of orthopaedic studies published in six major orthopaedic journals by women first or senior authors from 1987 to 2017? (2) Did men and women orthopaedic surgeons publish in equal proportions during the study period (measured in 5-year intervals)? (3) Are there differences in the characteristics (such as study type or subject focus) of orthopaedic publications authored by women and those authored by men? (4) Has the increased proportion of practicing women orthopaedic surgeons been matched by an equal increase in authorship by women orthopaedic surgeons during the study timeframe?, Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was designed to characterize trends in authorship of orthopaedic studies by women over time. All publications from the first issue of each of six major orthopaedic journals were evaluated at seven time points (1987, 1992, 1997, 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017). Characteristics of each first and senior author (including gender, academic degree, and specialty), and study category of each publication were collected. Articles for which this information was not available were excluded (35 of 1073, or 3.3% of published studies, no difference in proportion of excluded studies between journals). The proportions of women and men authors were compared at the seven time points and for six study categories (basic science, case report/technique article, clinical medicine, economics/practice management, editorial content [including true editorials, letters to the editor, commentaries, and book reviews] and review/meta-analysis) using a Fisher's exact test or chi-squared analysis. We compared the rates of change of women authorship, practicing women orthopaedic surgeons, and women orthopaedic residents during the study period using an ANOVA and Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) post-hoc test with Cohen's D measure of effect size., Results: From 1987 to 2017, only 1.7% (15 of 880) of senior authors and 4.4% (46 of 1038) of first authors of orthopaedic publications were women orthopaedic surgeons. Based on population proportions (that is, percent of practicing women orthopaedic surgeons compared with men), the proportion of women senior authors was less than would be expected at each time point after 1987 compared with men. There were no differences between the types of studies authored by women or men. Finally, during the study period, the rate of growth of women senior authorship was less than the rates of growth of both practicing women orthopaedic surgeons (d = 5.3, 95% CI, 4.8-5.6; p = 0.023) and women first authorship (d = -4.3, 95% CI -4.6 to -3.6, p = 0.030; estimated mean 3.3, p = 0.013)., Conclusions: Women orthopaedic surgeons published a small proportion of academic orthopaedic research from 1987 to 2017, and women senior authors consistently published less than would be expected based on their population proportion compared with men orthopaedic surgeons. Furthermore, the growth of practicing women orthopaedic surgeons has not been matched by growth in senior authorship by women over the same timeframe., Clinical Relevance: This discrepancy warrants further exploration because a low rate of publication may negatively impact the career advancement of women orthopaedic surgeons and contribute to the overall lack of gender diversity in orthopaedics. We suggest that journals and publishers review their editorial processes to ensure blinding of author names during peer review and editorial decision-making, and to disclose those review processes to authors. We also suggest that institutions encourage women trainees and junior faculty to participate in mentorship programs and specialty societies that promote academic productivity.