RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion in cardiothoracic surgery have garnered increased attention. Although barriers persist for women in our field, they may be ameliorated through enhanced support from allies. We aimed to determine best practices for allyship to better support female cardiothoracic surgeons. METHODS: A survey was electronically distributed to members of Women in Thoracic Surgery, addressing presence of female colleagues, sense of allyship among colleagues and leadership, and supportive versus detrimental characteristics of colleagues. Qualitative responses were grouped and coded to identify key themes. RESULTS: Of 309 Women in Thoracic Surgery members, 87 (28%) responded. More than half of respondents felt supported by their male colleagues in the areas of clinical practice, research, teaching, and personal life. Whereas 64% of respondents considered at least one woman in their division an ally, only 48% considered at least one man in their division an ally, and 53% considered their division chief or department chair an ally. A theme of mentorship, support, and sponsorship was reported as the most important quality of allies, regardless of gender. A theme of disrespect, discrimination, stereotyping, and unconscious bias was reported as the most detrimental characteristic of male colleagues, whereas a theme of competitiveness and undermining was reported as the most detrimental of female colleagues. Initiatives to enhance support for female cardiothoracic surgeons were identified, with increased access to mentorship and sponsorship consistently identified as an important endeavor. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing access to mentors, promoting positive behavior, and minimizing detrimental behavior may enhance support for female cardiothoracic surgeons.
Assuntos
Especialidades Cirúrgicas , Cirurgiões , Cirurgia Torácica , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Torácicos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , MentoresRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The traditional model of promotion and tenure in the health professions relies heavily on formal scholarship through teaching, research, and service. Institutions consider how much weight to give activities in each of these areas and determine a threshold for advancement. With the emergence of social media, scholars can engage wider audiences in creative ways and have a broader impact. Conventional metrics like the h-index do not account for social media impact. Social media engagement is poorly represented in most curricula vitae (CV) and therefore is undervalued in promotion and tenure reviews. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to develop crowdsourced guidelines for documenting social media scholarship. These guidelines aimed to provide a structure for documenting a scholar's general impact on social media, as well as methods of documenting individual social media contributions exemplifying innovation, education, mentorship, advocacy, and dissemination. METHODS: To create unifying guidelines, we created a crowdsourced process that capitalized on the strengths of social media and generated a case example of successful use of the medium for academic collaboration. The primary author created a draft of the guidelines and then sought input from users on Twitter via a publicly accessible Google Document. There was no limitation on who could provide input and the work was done in a democratic, collaborative fashion. Contributors edited the draft over a period of 1 week (September 12-18, 2020). The primary and secondary authors then revised the draft to make it more concise. The guidelines and manuscript were then distributed to the contributors for edits and adopted by the group. All contributors were given the opportunity to serve as coauthors on the publication and were told upfront that authorship would depend on whether they were able to document the ways in which they met the 4 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors authorship criteria. RESULTS: We developed 2 sets of guidelines: Guidelines for Listing All Social Media Scholarship Under Public Scholarship (in Research/Scholarship Section of CV) and Guidelines for Listing Social Media Scholarship Under Research, Teaching, and Service Sections of CV. Institutions can choose which set fits their existing CV format. CONCLUSIONS: With more uniformity, scholars can better represent the full scope and impact of their work. These guidelines are not intended to dictate how individual institutions should weigh social media contributions within promotion and tenure cases. Instead, by providing an initial set of guidelines, we hope to provide scholars and their institutions with a common format and language to document social media scholarship.
Assuntos
Bolsas de Estudo/normas , Ocupações em Saúde/educação , Mídias Sociais/normas , HumanosRESUMO
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/25070.].