Gender imbalance amongst promotion and leadership in academic surgical programs in Canada: A cross-sectional Investigation.

BACKGROUND: Women are underrepresented at higher levels of promotion or leadership despite the increasing number of women physicians. In surgery, this has been compounded by historical underrepresentation. With a nation-wide focus on the importance of diversity, our aim was to provide a current snapshot of gender representation in Canadian universities. METHODS: This cross-sectional online website review assessed the current faculty listings for 17 university-affiliated academic surgical training departments across Canada in the 2019/2020 academic year. Gender diversity of academic surgical faculty was assessed across surgical disciplines. Additionally, gender diversity in career advancement, as described by published leadership roles, promotion and faculty appointment, was analyzed. RESULTS: Women surgeons are underrepresented across Canadian surgical specialties (totals: 2,689 men versus 531 women). There are significant differences in the gender representation of surgeons between specialties and between universities, regardless of specialty. Women surgeons had a much lower likelihood of being at the highest levels of promotion (OR: 0.269, 95% CI: 0.179-0.405). Men surgeons were statistically more likely to hold academic leadership positions than women (p = 0.0002). Women surgeons had a much lower likelihood of being at the highest levels of leadership (OR: 0.372, 95% CI: 0.216-0.641). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that women surgeons are significantly underrepresented at the highest levels of academic promotion and leadership in Canada. Our findings allow for a direct comparison between Canadian surgical subspecialties and universities. Individual institutions can use these data to critically appraise diversity policies already in place, assess their workforce and apply a metric from which change can be measured.

Grounded in Justice: An Equity Framework for Chief Residents.

The 2019-2020 academic year was unprecedented, with navigating the COVID-19 pandemic and meaningfully engaging with the causes and consequences of long-standing racism and social injustice in the United States. In this article, the authors, all former chief residents, reflect on how they carried out their role during this last year using an approach that was grounded in equity and justice. They describe a framework based on their experiences, including setting the tone and culture of the residency program; providing medical education, teaching, and feedback; advocating for resident well-being and inclusion; participating in quality improvement and hospital policymaking; and partnering for institutional change. They end with a call to action to reconceptualize the role of the chief resident to include the genuine work of diversity, equity, and inclusion to ensure a more equitable future.

COVID-19 Threatens Progress Toward Gender Equity Within Academic Medicine.

Women remain underrepresented within academic medicine despite past and present efforts to promote gender equity. The authors discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic could stymie progress toward gender parity within the biomedical workforce and limit the retention and advancement of women in science and medicine. Women faculty face distinct challenges as they navigate the impact of shelter-in-place and social distancing on work and home life. An unequal division of household labor and family care between men and women means women faculty are vulnerable to inequities that may develop in the workplace as they strive to maintain academic productivity and professional development without adequate assistance with domestic tasks and family care. Emerging data suggest that gender differences in academic productivity may be forthcoming as a direct result of the pandemic. Existing gender inequities in professional visibility, networking, and collaboration may be exacerbated as activities transition from in-person to virtual environments and create new barriers to advancement. Meanwhile, initiatives designed to promote gender equity within academic medicine may lose key funding due to the economic impact of COVID-19 on higher education. To ensure that the gender gap within academic medicine does not widen, the authors call upon academic leaders and the broader biomedical community to support women faculty through deliberate actions that promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion. The authors provide several recommendations, including faculty needs assessments; review of gender bias within tenure-clock-extension offers; more opportunities for mentorship, sponsorship, and professional recognition; and financial commitments to support equity initiatives. Leadership for these efforts should be at the institutional and departmental levels, and leaders should ensure a gender balance on task forces and committees to avoid overburdening women faculty with additional service work. Together, these strategies will contribute to the development of a more equitable workforce capable of transformative medical discovery and care.

Violence against trainees: urgent ethical challenges for medical educators and academic leaders in perinatal medicine.

Objectives Violence against medical trainees confronts medical educators and academic leaders in perinatal medicine with urgent ethical challenges. Despite their evident importance, these ethical challenges have not received sufficient attention. The purpose of this paper is to provide an ethical framework to respond to these ethical challenges. Methods We used an existing critical appraisal tool to conduct a scholarly review, to identify publications on the ethical challenges of violence against trainees. We conducted web searches to identify reports of violence against trainees in Mexico. Drawing on professional ethics in perinatal medicine, we describe an ethical framework that is unique in the literature on violence against trainees in its appeal to the professional virtue of self-sacrifice and its justified limits. Results Our search identified no previous publications that address the ethical challenges of violence against trainees. We identified reports of violence and their limitations. The ethical framework is based on the professional virtue of self-sacrifice in professional ethics in perinatal medicine. This virtue creates the ethical obligation of trainees to accept reasonable risks of life and health but not unreasonable risks. Society has the ethical obligation to protect trainees from these unreasonable risks. Medical educators should protect personal safety. Academic leaders should develop and implement policies to provide such protection. Institutions of government should provide effective law enforcement and fair trials of those accused of violence against trainees. International societies should promulgate ethics statements that can be applied to violence against trainees. By protecting trainees, medical educators and academic leaders in perinatology will also protect pregnant, fetal, and neonatal patients. Conclusions This paper is the first to provide an ethical framework, based on the professional virtue of self-sacrifice and its justified limits, to guide medical educators and academic leaders in perinatal medicine who confront ethical challenges of violence against their trainees.

Analysis of Open Payments Receipts Among Surgical Faculty at a Large Academic Institution.

BACKGROUND: Section 6002 of the Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as "The Sunshine Act," is legislation designed to provide transparency to the relationship between physicians and industry. Since 2013, medical product and pharmaceutical manufacturers were required to report any payments made to physicians to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). We predicted that most clinical faculty at our institution would be found on the Open Payments website. We elected to investigate payments in relationship to divisions within the department of surgery and the level of professorship. METHODS: All clinical faculty (n = 86) within the department of surgery at our institution were searched within the database: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/. The total amount of payments, number of payments, and the nature of payments (food and beverage, travel and lodging, consulting, education, speaking, entertainment, gifts and honoraria) were recorded for 2017. Comparison by unpaired t-test (or ANOVA) where applicable, significance defined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 86 faculty studied, 75% were found within the CMS Open Payments database in 2017. The mean amount of payment was $4024 (range $13-152,215). Median amount of payment was $434.90 (range $12.75-152,214.70). Faculty receiving outside compensation varied significantly by division and academic rank (P < 0.05). Plastic surgery had the highest percentage of people receiving any form of payment ($143-$1912) and GI surgery had the largest payments associated with device management ($0-$152,215). The variation seen by rank was driven by a small number of faculty with receipt of large payments at the associate professor level. The median amount of payment was $428.53 (range $13.97-2306.05) for assistant professors, $5328.03 (range $28.30-152,214.70) for Associate Professors, and $753.82 (range $12.75-17,708.65) for full professors. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of open payments to CMS provides transparency between physicians and industry. The significant relationship of division and rank with open payments database is driven by relatively few faculty. The majority (94%) received either no payments or less than $10,000.

Does growing up with a physician influence the ethics of medical students' relationships with the pharmaceutical industry? The cases of the US and Poland.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools have a major impact on future doctors' ethics and their attitudes towards cooperation with the pharmaceutical industry. From childhood, medical students who are related to a physician are exposed to the characteristics of a medical career and learn its professional ethics not only in school but also in the family setting. The present paper sought to answer the research question: 'How does growing up with a physician influence medical students' perceptions of conflicts of interest in their relationships with industry?' METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was completed by 451 medical students from four Philadelphia medical schools and 554 medical students from Warsaw Medical University during 2013. Medical schools in these two cities were chosen because they are both university cities with similar population sizes. Students who had and who did not have a family member working as a physician were compared using chi-square analysis. Data were analysed for each country separately. RESULTS: For both the US and Poland, there were statistically significant differences (p < .05) between medical students with a physician as a family member and other students with respect to views regarding relationship with the pharmaceutical industry. In both groups, this difference occurred for three important dimensions: students' relationship with the pharmaceutical industry; students' views on physicians' rights to cooperate with the pharmaceutical industry; trust in the pharmaceutical industry. In the US, students related to a doctor were characterized by more restrictive opinions on all three dimensions than other students (e.g., 27.8% of the former students vs. 31.4% of the latter students thought doctors had unrestricted rights to cooperate with the industry). However, the contrary was observed in Poland: students with a physician in the family had less strict views than their colleagues (e.g., 56.8% of the former vs. 39.7% of the latter thought that doctors should have unrestricted rights of cooperation). CONCLUSIONS: In Poland, a former communist country, physicians transmit a more liberal approach towards collaboration with the pharmaceutical industry to their student relatives than those in the US.

Making progress in the ethical treatment of medical trainees.

There is an inherent conflict within clinician educators as we balance the roles of healthcare provider to patients in need of care with that of educator of learners in need of teaching. In this essay we use Beauchamp and Childress' principles of biomedical ethics as a framework to compare the relationship that clinician educators have with their patients and their learners, and suggest that while we typically apply ethical principles when addressing the needs of our patients, these principles are frequently lacking in our interactions with learners. This dichotomy reflects a person-by-situation interaction that may be partly explained by the expectations of the regulatory bodies that define how clinicians should interact with patients and how educators should interact with learners. The result is that we may fall short in applying respect for autonomy, beneficence/nonmaleficence, and justice when addressing the needs of our learners. Fortunately there are ways in which we can incorporate these ethical principles into our interactions with learners while still adhering to accreditation standards and institutional policy. These include flipped classrooms and simulated learning experiences, incorporating aspects of instructional design that have been shown to improve learning outcomes, providing additional resources to learners with greater needs, and organizing training curricula around entrustable professional activities. Although the consistent application of ethical principles with all learners during all learning experiences is likely unachievable, we can, and should, move towards more ethical treatment of our learners.