Gender Differences in Clinical Practice and Medicare Reimbursement Among Mohs Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Medicare reimbursement and clinical activity between male and female dermatologic surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment data from 2018 was performed for all dermatologists performing MMS. Provider gender, place of service, number of services, and average payment per service was recorded for all relevant procedure codes. RESULTS: Women represented 31.5% of the 2,581 surgeons who performed MMS in 2018. Women were paid significantly less than men (mean difference, -$73,033). On average, women performed 123 fewer cases than their male counterparts. When surgeons were stratified by productivity, remuneration was the same. CONCLUSION: Remuneration from CMS was disparate between male and female dermatologic surgeons, which may be attributed to submission of fewer charges by women. Further efforts are necessary to better evaluate and address causes for this discrepancy, because greater parity of opportunity and pay would greatly benefit this subspecialty of dermatology.

Characterizing the role of dermatologists in developing artificial intelligence for assessment of skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) for skin cancer assessment has been an emerging topic in dermatology. Leadership of dermatologists is necessary in defining how these technologies fit into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the evolution of AI in skin cancer assessment and characterize the involvement of dermatologists in developing these technologies. METHODS: An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed by searching machine learning or artificial intelligence combined with skin cancer or melanoma. Articles were included if they used AI for screening and diagnosis of skin cancer using data sets consisting of dermoscopic images or photographs of gross lesions. RESULTS: Fifty-one articles were included, and 41% of these had dermatologists included as authors. Articles that included dermatologists described algorithms built with more images versus articles that did not include dermatologists (mean, 12,111 vs 660 images, respectively). In terms of underlying technology, AI used for skin cancer assessment has followed trends in the field of image recognition. LIMITATIONS: This review focused on models described in the medical literature and did not account for those described elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: Greater involvement of dermatologists is needed in thinking through issues in data collection, data set biases, and applications of technology. Dermatologists can provide access to large, diverse data sets that are increasingly important for building these models.

The Evolving Presence of Women in Academic Plastic Surgery: A Study of the Past 40 Years.

BACKGROUND: Among surgical subspecialties, plastic surgery holds the highest percentage of women, and, the female contingent of board-certified plastic surgeons and trainees has grown steadily. However, their academic impact has been underestimated. We present the academic footprint of female plastic surgeons over the past 40 years. METHODS: A list of female plastic surgeons currently active at, and retired from, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited plastic surgery residency programs was compiled. Each surgeon was searched on PubMed to gather their total number of publications, journals, and topics of research after completion of training. Date of publication and 5-year impact factor for each journal were recorded. Publications were organized into 10-year periods (1976 to 1985, 1986 to 1995, 1996 to 2005, and 2006 to 2016). RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five currently active and 80 retired academic female plastic surgeons were identified, who published 2982 articles in 479 peer-reviewed journals. The average 5-year impact factor was 4.093. The number of publications increased with each decade: 37 (1976 to 1985), 218 (1986 to 1995), 472 (1996 to 2005), and 2255 (2006 to 2016). The most commonly published areas were hand/nerve (22 percent), craniofacial (21 percent), and breast (20 percent). Over time, publications in hand/nerve research decreased (76, 60, 38, and 14 percent, respectively); craniofacial-related publications increased (8, 11, 18, and 23 percent, respectively); and publications in breast research increased (0, 8, 9, and 24 percent, respectively). The 2006 to 2016 period yielded the most even distribution of research topics. CONCLUSION: The academic contribution of female plastic surgeons has substantially increased in number and has become more evenly distributed across subspecialty topics.