PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Gender Disparity in Surgery: An Evaluation of Surgical Societies Open PDF(Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., Publishers, 2019) ;Lyons, Nicole B. ;Bernardi, Karla ;Huang, Lillian ;Holihan, Julie L.Cherla, DeepaBackground: The percentage of female surgeons and surgery residents has increased slowly to 24% and 35%, respectively. However, women remain under-represented in surgical leadership positions (<20%). Society awards and leadership positions are used for hiring and promoting surgeons. We hypothesized that within the Surgical Infection Society (SIS), females are under-represented.Methods: The SIS website and databases were consulted for the number of female members, awardees, and leaders. Representation was divided into four time periods: 2000–2005, 2006–2010, 2011–2015, and 2016–2017 and compared for changes over time utilizing a Χ2 test. In addition, we reviewed the council members of five other surgical societies and compared the percentage of female representation in leadership positions.Results: Since the SIS was founded, there have been 587 members of whom only 135 (23%) are female. There has been an increase in female membership over time (p < 0.001). The number of female awardees rose from 37% during the first two study periods to more than 50% in the last two periods (p = 0.002). However, female representation in leadership positions decreased from 26% in 2000–2005 to less than 15% in the last three study periods (p = 0.234). Similar disparities emerged when comparing the SIS with other surgical societies: Women have represented only 24% (range 8%–42%) of leaders and 4% (range 0–11%) of society presidents.Conclusions: Female surgeons are under-represented in the SIS membership and leadership positions. Whereas the number of female surgeons and residents has increased, these trends have not occurred with council membership and leadership within the SIS. There is a need to address this gender disparity.Item type:Publication, Gender Disparity Among Surgical Peer-Reviewed Literature Open PDF(2020) ;Bernardi, Karla ;Lyons, Nicole B. ;Huang, Lillian ;Holihan, Julie L.Olavarria, Oscar A.BACKGROUND: Women remain under-represented in academic surgery despite increasing percentages of female surgeons and surgery residents. Publications and leadership positions are used for hiring and promoting academic surgeons. We sought to determine the disparity of female authorship when compared with male authors in surgical peer-reviewed publications. METHODS: PubMed was searched for surgical publications from the United States. Obstetrics and gynecology was selected as a control specialty owing to its history of high female representation. Thirteen other surgical specialties were randomly selected from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education specialty list. Manuscripts from four time periods, 2000-2005, 2006-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2017, were randomly selected, and the gender of the first and last authors was determined. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and Association of American Medical Colleges databases were used to determine women representation in surgery. Trends were assessed using the Cochran-Armitage test. RESULTS: In total, 560 manuscripts in 14 specialties were reviewed. In the control specialty, 51% of first authors were female compared with 18% of those in study specialties, and 39% of last authors were female compared with 11% of those in study specialties. No difference was found when comparing the gender of first (P-value = 0.393) and/or last authors (P-value = 0.281) with the proportion of female residents and attendings. CONCLUSIONS: Women surgeons publish research at a rate proportional to the number of females involved in that specialty. Disparities in leadership roles are unlikely explained by differences in publications. Instead, disparities are likely due to other reasons such as failure to attract women to academic surgery and failure to promote and mentor women surgeons into leadership positions.