PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Medical SchoolViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    United States Medical School Academic Faculty Workforce Diversity, Institutional Characteristics, and Geographical Distributions From 2014-2018
    (2022)
    Ogunyemi, Dotun
    ;
    Okekpe, C. Camille
    ;
    Barrientos, Devin R.
    ;
    Bui, Tina
    ;
    Au, Melanie N.
    Purpose Academic healthcare workforce diversity is important in addressing health disparities. Our goal was to evaluate trends and associations in faculty diversity of United States (US) medical schools over a five-year period. Methods We analyzed the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster data of 151 US medical schools from 2014-2018. Outcome faculty variables were female gender, underrepresented in medicine (UiM), age, and professorial representation. Predictor variables included geographical distributions, and institutional characteristics. Statistical analysis included Jonckheere-Terpstra test, ANOVA, and regression analysis. Results Female faculty increased from 37.6% to 40.4% (p<0.001), senior faculty (age >60 years) from 22.6% to 25.9% (p=0.001) while UiM faculty stayed relatively flat from 9.74% to 10.08% (p=0.773). UiM [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.39, p=0.015], and female faculty (aOR=0.3, p=0.001) had independently significantly decreased associations with professorial representation, while senior faculty had increased associations (aOR=3.82, p<0.001). Significant independent differences occurred in female, UiM, and professorial faculty distributions within US regions; Hispanic faculty were highest in Southwest (6.57%) and lowest in Midwest region (1.59%), while African-American faculty were highest in Southeast (8.15%) but lowest in the West (3.12%). UiM faculty had significantly independent decreased associations with MD/PhD degree (aOR=0.30, p=0.004) and higher US ranking institutions (aOR=0.45, p=0.009). Conclusions From 2014 to 2018, female faculty increased modestly while the UiM faculty trend remained flat. Female and UiM faculty were less represented at the professor level. UiM faculty were less represented in higher-ranking institutions. Geographic location is associated with faculty diversity.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Declining racial and ethnic representation in clinical academic medicine: A longitudinal study of 16 US medical specialties Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Lett, Elle
    ;
    Orji, Whitney U.
    ;
    Sebro, Ronnie
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in racial, ethnic, and sex representation at US medical schools across 16 specialties: internal medicine, pediatrics, surgery, psychiatry, radiology, anesthesiology, obstetrics and gynecology, neurology, family practice, pathology, emergency medicine, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and dermatology. Using a novel, Census-derived statistical measure of diversity, the S-score, we quantified the degree of underrepresentation for racial minority groups and female faculty by rank for assistant, associate, and full professors from 1990-2016. METHODS: This longitudinal study of faculty diversity uses data obtained from the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster from US allopathic medical schools. The proportion of professors of racial minority groups and female faculty by rank was compared to the US population based on data from the US Census Bureau. The Roster includes data on 52,939 clinical medical faculty in 1990, and 129,545 in 2016, at the assistant professor level or higher. The primary measure used in this study was the S-score, a measure of representation based on the probability of the observed frequency of faculty from a racial/ethnic group and sex, given the racial and ethnic distribution of the US. Pearson correlations and 95% confidence intervals for S-score with time were used to measure trends. RESULTS: Blacks and Hispanics showed statistically significant trends (p<0.05) towards increasing underrepresentation in most specialties and are more underrepresented in 2016 than in 1990 across all ranks and specialties analyzed, except for Black females in obstetrics & gynecology. White females were also underrepresented in many specialties and in a subset of specialties trended toward greater underrepresentation. CONCLUSIONS: Current efforts to improve faculty diversity are inadequate in generating an academic physician workforce that represents the diversity of the US. More aggressive measures for faculty recruitment, retention, and promotion are necessary to reach equity in academia and healthcare.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in Medical Student Research Awards: A 13-Year Study from the Yale School of Medicine Open PDF 
    (Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2018)
    King, J.T.
    ;
    Angoff, N.R.
    ;
    Forrest, J.N.
    ;
    Justice, A.C.
    Purpose The Liaison Committee on Medical Education mandates instruction in research conduct, and many U.S. Medical schools require students to complete a research project. All Yale School of Medicine (YSM) graduating students submit a research thesis, and ∼5% are awarded highest honors. Gender disparities exist in areas related to physician research productivity, including academic rank, research funding, and publications. The authors asked whether gender disparities exist for medical student research. Method The authors conducted a retrospective review of 1,120 theses submitted by graduating medical students from 2003 to 2015 at YSM and collected data on gender, mentoring, research type, sponsoring department, and other characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression modeling examined gender differences in medical student research awards. Results Women authored 50.9% of theses, but earned only 30.9% of highest honors awards (OR 0.41; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.74). Among factors associated with increased receipt of highest honors that differed by gender, men were more likely than women to work with a mentor with a history of three or more thesis honorees, take a fifth year of study, secure competitive research funding, undertake an MD-master of health science degree, and conduct laboratory research (all P <.001). After adjustment for these factors, and for underrepresented in medicine status and sponsoring department, women remained less likely to receive highest honors (OR 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.98). Conclusions Women YSM students were less likely to receive highest honors for medical research. Gender disparities in postgraduate biomedical research success may start during undergraduate medical education. © 2018 by the Association of American Medical Colleges. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Academic Radiology in the United States: Defining Gender Disparities in Faculty Leadership and Academic Rank Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Goswami, Abhishek K.
    ;
    Kokabi, Nima
    ;
    Khaja, Minhaj S.
    ;
    Saad, Wael E.
    ;
    Khaja, Akram
    RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Female physicians in academic medicine have faced barriers that potentially affect representation in different fields and delay promotion. Little is known about gender representation differences in United States academic radiology departments, particularly within the most pursued subspecialties. PURPOSE: To determine whether gender differences exist in United States academic radiology departments across seven subspecialties with respect to academic ranks, departmental leadership positions, experience, and scholarly metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study from November 2018 to June 2020, a database of United States academic radiologists at 129 academic departments in seven subspecialties was created. Each radiologist's academic rank, departmental leadership position (executive-level - Chair, Director, Chief, and Department or Division Head vs vice-level - vice, assistant, or associate positions of executive level), self-identified gender, years in practice, and measures of scholarly productivity (number of publications, citations, and h-index) were compiled from institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, Scopus, and official NPI profiles. The primary outcome, gender composition differences in these cohorts, was analyzed using Chi2 while continuous data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. The adjusted gender difference for all factors was determined using a multivariate logistic regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 5086 academic radiologists (34.7% women) with a median 14 years of practice (YOP) were identified and indexed. There were 919 full professors (26.1% women, p < 0.01) and 1055 executive-level leadership faculty (30.6% women, p < 0.01). Within all subspecialties except breast imaging, women were in the minority (35.4% abdominal, 79.1% breast, 12.1% interventional, 27.5% musculoskeletal, 22.8% neuroradiology, 45.1% pediatric, and 19.5% nuclear; p < 0.01). Relative to subspecialty gender composition, women full professors were underrepresented in abdominal, pediatric, and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05) and women in any executive-level leadership were underrepresented in abdominal and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05). However, after adjusting for h-index and YOP, gender did not influence rates of professorship or executive leadership. The strongest single predictors for professorship or executive leadership were h-index and YOP. CONCLUSION: Women academic radiologists in the United States are underrepresented among senior faculty members despite having similar levels of experience as men. Gender disparities regarding the expected number of women senior faculty members relative to individual subspecialty gender composition were more pronounced in abdominal and nuclear radiology, and less pronounced in breast and neuroradiology. Overall, h-index and YOP were the strongest predictors for full-professorship and executive leadership among faculty. KEY RESULTS: ● Though women comprise 34.7% of all academic radiologists, women are underrepresented among senior faculty members (26.1% of full professors and 30.6% of executive leadership) ● Women in junior faculty positions had higher median years of practice than their male counterparts (10 vs 8 for assistant professors, 21 vs 13 for vice leadership) ● Years of practice and h-index were the strongest predictors for full professorship and executive leadership.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Diversification of Academic Surgery, Its Leadership, and the Importance of Intersectionality Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Riner, Andrea N.
    ;
    Herremans, Kelly M.
    ;
    Neal, Daniel W.
    ;
    Johnson-Mann, Crystal
    ;
    Hughes, Steven J.
    Importance: Diversity in academic surgery is lacking, particularly among positions of leadership. Objective: To evaluate trends among racial/ethnical minority groups stratified by gender along the surgical pipeline, as well as in surgical leadership. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis assessed US surgical faculty census data obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges faculty roster in the Faculty Administrative Management Online User System database. Surgical faculty members captured in census data from December 31, 2013, to December 31, 2019, were included in the analysis. Faculty were identified from the surgery category of the faculty roster, which includes general surgeons and subspecialists, neurosurgeons, and urologists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Gender and race/ethnicity were obtained for surgical faculty stratified by rank. Descriptive statistics with annual percentage of change in representation are reported based on faculty rank. Results: A total of 15 653 US surgical faculty, including 3876 women (24.8%), were included in the data set for 2019. Female faculty from racial/ethnic minority groups experienced an increase in representation at instructor and assistant and associate professorship appointments, with a more favorable trajectory than male faculty from racial/ethnic minority groups across nearly all ranks. White faculty maintain most leadership positions as full professors (3105 of 3997 [77.7%]) and chairs (294 of 380 [77.4%]). The greatest magnitude of underrepresentation along the surgical pipeline has been among Black (106 of 3997 [2.7%]) and Hispanic/Latinx (176 of 3997 [4.4%]) full professors. Among full professors, although Black and Hispanic/Latinx male representation increased modestly (annual change, 0.07% and 0.10%, respectively), Black female representation remained constant (annual change, 0.00004%) and Hispanic/Latinx female representation decreased (annual change, -0.16%). Overall Hispanic/Latinx (20 of 380 [5.3%]) and Black (13 of 380 [3.4%]) representation as chairs has not changed, with only 1 Black and 1 Hispanic/Latinx woman ascending to chair from 2013 to 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: A disproportionately small number of faculty from minority groups obtain leadership positions in academic surgery. Intersectionality may leave female members of racial/ethnic minority groups more disadvantaged than their male colleagues in achieving leadership positions. These findings highlight the urgency to diversify surgical leadership.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Silent Bias: Challenges, Obstacles, and Strategies for Leadership Development in Academic Medicine-Lessons From Oral Histories of Women Professors at the University of Kansas Open PDF 
    (2016)
    Pingleton, Susan K.
    ;
    Jones, Emily V. M.
    ;
    Rosolowski, Tacey A.
    ;
    Zimmerman, Mary K.
    PURPOSE: Despite dramatic increases in female learners and junior faculty, a significant gap remains in female leadership in academic medicine. To assess challenges and obstacles encountered, strategies for academic success, and lessons learned for leadership development, the authors conducted an in-depth study of women full professors. METHOD: The authors used a qualitative oral history approach, interviewing 87% of the cohort of female full professors at one Midwestern medical school in 2013 using a pretested, open-ended, semistructured interview guide. Interviews were videotaped and the audio recordings transcribed. Content was sorted into categories and key themes identified within each category. RESULTS: Participants described significant challenges: being treated with "silent bias," "being ignored," and being seen as an "other." Coping strategies included downplaying, keeping a distance, employing humor, and using symbols (e.g., white coat) to carefully present themselves. Explanations for success included intelligence, meritocracy, being even-tempered, and carefully constructing femininity. The participants recommended individual skills and actions to prepare for leadership development. Virtually all women could describe an individual mentor (sponsor), usually male, who provided essential assistance for their career success. At the same time, they stressed the importance of institutional support for diversity, especially with child care. CONCLUSIONS: Attaining "full professor" status is the pinnacle of academic success. Women who successfully navigated this academic ladder describe significant external and internal challenges that require multiple strategies to overcome. Leadership development entails a combination of individual support through mentors and sponsors, self-education and reflection, and organizational structural support to promote diversity.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Two decades of little change: An analysis of U.S. medical school basic science faculty by sex, race/ethnicity, and academic rank Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Bennett, Christopher L.
    ;
    Salinas, Raquel Y.
    ;
    Locascio, Joseph J.
    ;
    Boyer, Edward W.
    To examine changes in U.S. medical school basic science faculty over the last 20 years (1998-2018), we undertook an observational study utilizing data from the American Association of Medical Colleges Faculty Roster. Rank (Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor), sex (Female), and race/ethnicity (Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic, and White) were analyzed; this reflected a population of 14,047 (1998) to 18,601 (2018) faculty. Summary percent of faculty in various gender, race/ethnicity origin categories were analyzed across years of the study using regression models. We found that females (24.47% to 35.32%) were underrepresented at all timepoints and a minority of faculty identified as Black or African American (1.57% to 1.99%), Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic (3.03% to 4.44%), or Asian (10.90% to 20.41%). The largest population at all time points was White Male Professors (30.53% to 20.85%), followed by White Male Associate Professors (15.67% to 9.34%), and White Male Assistant Professors (13.22% to 9.75%). Small statistically significant increases were observed among female faculty and faculty at multiple ranks who identified as Black or African American or Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic. We then completed secondary analyses looking at the interaction of race/ethnicity and Gender. We found: (1) a significant increase (p<0.0001) in both genders who identify as Asian although males had a higher rate of increase (6 point difference, p<0.0001); (2) a significant increase for Black or African American females (P<0.01) not found among males; (3) significant increases (p<0.0001) among both genders of faculty who identify as Hispanic, Latino, Spanish Origin, or Multiple Race-Hispanic although females had an approximately 1% higher rate of increase; and (4) among faculty who identify as White, males had a significant decrease (p<0.0001) while females demonstrated an increase (p<0.0001).