Uneven Progress in Gender Equality at Plastic Surgery Conferences: Lessons from a Decade of Meetings.

BACKGROUND: The demographics of plastic surgeons and plastic surgery trainees are changing, reflecting an increase in the diversity of medical school graduates. The authors investigated the gender diversity of speakers at several plastic surgery conferences and evaluated temporal trends over a 10-year period. METHODS: The following societies' conferences and years were included based on the conference agendas available for review: American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Plastic Surgery Research Council, American Association of Plastic Surgeons, Northeastern Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery. Differences in the average amount of time spoken were analyzed using an independent one-tailed t test. RESULTS: The number of female speakers and the time allotted to speak increased for all conferences. There was not a consistent difference in the amount of time individual men and women were allotted to speak. Across the five conferences, there was no consistent relationship found between years since board certification and female participation in conference. Gender diversity among speakers at plastic surgery conferences has not kept pace with the increase in female plastic surgery trainees because those who are selected to speak are overwhelmingly men. The hypothesis that a paucity of female speakers reflects the relatively shorter duration of career experience of female plastic surgeons was not supported by these findings. CONCLUSION: It is imperative that conferences increase the participation of women and strive toward more accurately reflecting the burgeoning role that female surgeons have in the field at present and will have in the future.

Trends in Number of Women Speakers at the American Head and Neck Society Meetings, 2007-2019.

Importance: The number of female speakers at American Head and Neck Society (AHNS) conferences should ideally be consistent with the number of women entering head and neck surgery fellowships to ensure gender equity in the field. Yet the presence of women speakers at the annual AHNS meetings, which is specific to the field of head and neck cancer, endocrine and microvascular reconstructive surgery, has yet to be studied. Objective: To determine whether the proportion of female speakers at the AHNS has increased in a manner consistent with the numbers of women entering fellowships since 2007. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study assessed 13 final meeting programs from AHNS national/international conferences from 2007 to 2019. The number of male and female participants in different roles throughout the meeting were retrospectively tracked. Participants were male and female speakers at AHNS national/international conferences who took part in the roles of scientific session presenter, scientific session moderator, expert panelist, miscellaneous moderator, and named lecturers/keynote speaker. Gender of the speaker was determined by searching names on the internet and using available published pronouns. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of speaking opportunities for men and women in different roles from 2007 to 2019 as well as number of men and women entering AHNS fellowships since 2007 and new active AHNS members since 2012. Results: In this qualitative study, from 2007 to 2019, 4059 speakers were identified. Of these speakers, 902 (22%) were women and 3157 (78%) were men. Overall, there was a strong correlation between increasing years and number of women speakers from 2007 to 2019 (ρ = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.72-0.78). There were 2096 invited speaking roles that excluded research presentations, of which 400 were offered to female participants (19.1%) across the study period. There were 131 different women that made up all 400 of the opportunities that were offered to women in the years surveyed. There was a strong correlation in the proportion of women as presenters for oral abstracts, expert panelists, and miscellaneous moderators between the years but no correlation in scientific session moderators and named lecturers/keynote speakers. Of the 45 named lecturers/keynote speakers in the programs tracked, only 2 were women. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, from 2007 to 2019, the presence of women at ANHS has increased overall, reflecting the changing demographic characteristics of those entering in head and neck oncology and microvascular surgery fellowships. However, a strong disparity continues to exist for preeminent speaking opportunities.

Gender Disparity in Surgical Society Leadership and Annual Meeting Programs.

INTRODUCTION: Prior work suggests women surgical role models attract more female medical students into surgical training. We investigate recent trends of women in surgical society leadership and national conference moderator and plenary speaker roles. METHODS: Gender distribution was surveyed at 15 major surgical societies and 14 conferences from 2014 to 2018 using publicly reported data. Roles were categorized as leadership (executive council), moderator, or plenary speaker. Data were cross-checked from online profiles and by contacting societies. Logistic regression with Huber-White clustering by society was utilized to evaluate proportions of women in each role over time and determine associations between the proportion of women in executive leadership, and scientific session moderators and plenary speakers. RESULTS: The proportion of leadership positions held by women increased slightly from 2014 to 2018 (20.6%-26.6%, P = 0.23), as did the proportion of moderators (26.2%-30.6%, P = 0.027) and plenary speakers (26.2%-30.9%, P = 0.058). The proportion of women in each role varied significantly across societies (all P < 0.001): leaders (range 0.0%-52.0%), moderators (12.5%-58.8%), and plenary speakers (11.3%-60.0%). Three patterns of change were observed: eight societies (53.3%) demonstrated increases in representation of women over time, four societies (26.6%) showed stable moderate-to-good gender balance, and three societies (20.0%) had consistent underrepresentation of women. CONCLUSION: There is significant variability in the representation of women at the leadership level of national surgical societies and participating at national surgical conferences as moderators and plenary speakers. Over the past 5 years some societies have achieved advances in gender equity, but many societies still have substantial room for improvement.

Ensuring equity, diversity, and inclusion in the Society for Vascular Surgery: A report of the Society for Vascular Surgery Task Force on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion represent interconnected goals meant to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their innate identity characteristics, feel welcomed and valued among their peers. Equity is achieved when all individuals have equal access to leadership and career advancement opportunities as well as fair compensation for their work. It is well-known that the unique backgrounds and perspectives contributed by a diverse workforce strengthen and improve medical organizations overall. The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) is committed to supporting the highest quality leadership, patient care, surgical education, and societal recommendations through promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion within the SVS. The overarching goal of this document is to provide specific context and guidance for enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion within the SVS as well as setting the tone for conduct and processes beyond the SVS, within other national and regional vascular surgery organizations and practice settings.

Update on workforce diversity in vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Creating a diverse workforce is paramount to the success of the surgical field. A diverse workforce allows us to meet the health needs of an increasingly diverse population and to bring new ideas to spur technical innovation. The purpose of this study was to assess trends in workforce diversity within vascular surgery (VS) and general surgery (GS) as compared with orthopedic surgery (OS)-a specialty that instituted a formal diversity initiative over a decade ago. METHODS: Data on the trainee pool for VS (fellowships and integrated residencies), GS, and OS were obtained from the U.S. Graduate Medical Education reports for 1999 through 2017. Medical student demographic data were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges U.S. medical school enrollment reports. The representation of surgical trainee populations (female, Hispanic, and black) was normalized by their representation in medical school. We also performed the χ2 test to compare proportions of residents over dichotomized time periods (1999-2005 and 2013-2017) as well as a more sensitive trend of proportions test. RESULTS: The proportion of female trainees increased significantly between the time periods for the three surgical disciplines examined (P < .001). Hispanic trainees also represented an increasing proportion of all three disciplines (P ≤ .001). The proportion of black trainees did not significantly change in any discipline between the two periods. Relative to their proportion in medical school, Hispanic trainees were well represented in all surgical specialties studied (normalized ratio [NR], 0.95-1.52: 0.95 OS, 1.00 GS, 1.53 VS fellowship, and 1.23 VS residency). Compared with their representation in medical school, women were under-represented as surgical trainees (NR: 0.32 OS, 0.82 GS, 0.56 VS fellowship, and 0.78 VS residency) as were black trainees (NR: 0.63 OS, 0.90 GS, 0.99 VS fellowship, and 0.81 VS residency). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were significant increases in the number of women and Hispanic trainees in these three surgical disciplines, only Hispanic trainees enter the surgical field at a rate higher than their proportion in medical school. The lack of an increase in black trainees across all specialties was particularly discouraging. Women and black trainees were under-represented in all specialties as compared with their representation in medical school. The data presented suggest potential problems with recruitment at multiple levels of the pipeline. Particular attention should be paid to increasing the pool of minority medical school graduates who are both interested in and competitive for surgical specialties.

Achieving Gender Equity Is Our Responsibility: Leadership Matters.

Across academic medicine, and particularly among faculty and medical school leadership, the status quo is unacceptable when it comes to gender diversity, equity, and inclusion. The Association of American Medical Colleges has launched a bold gender equity initiative, endorsed by its Board of Directors, to implore academic medical institutions to take meaningful and effective actions.Defining what progress should look like to guide these actions is worth deeper exploration. It is not enough to measure the representation of different genders at various levels of leadership within our institutions. Research and experience we share suggests more must be done, especially for women of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. What is needed is a fundamental conversation about privilege, intersectionality across different backgrounds, and progress.Institutional leaders have a choice to make. Will we make gender equity a top priority system-wide because we recognize that doing so leads to organizational excellence? Do we understand that establishing a robust, comprehensive definition of gender equity and how it is practiced will result in better outcomes for all? And are we ready and able to prioritize and be accountable for efforts that are measurable, with clear definitions of progress; driven and reinforced by leadership directives; inclusive of all, including men as well as women of diverse backgrounds and orientations; and systemic rather than ad-hoc? Implementing such actions requires initiating difficult conversations, making conscious choices, and modeling best practices from leaders who have successfully made gender equity a priority.

Female Representation in Otolaryngology Leadership Roles.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Characterization of leadership within otolaryngology is key to evaluating trends and promoting program advancement. This study evaluates representation of women in otolaryngology holding residency and fellowship directorships, or chair positions, comparing sex differences in academic rank, years in practice, and scholarly activity. STUDY DESIGN: Cross sectional analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive list of otolaryngology residency and fellowship directors from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs in 2017 to 2018 was compiled. Academic rank and years in practice were determined from departmental websites, with online search tools used as secondary resources. The h-index was utilized as a measure of research productivity. Regression analysis was performed to analyze these variables. RESULTS: Among the 306 directorships, women held 57 (18.6%) of these positions, 27 (26.5%) residency and 30 (14.7%) fellowship directorships. Of the 99 chair positions, five (5.1%) were held by women. The majority (53.6%) of male directors were full professors, whereas only 26.3% of females were full professors (P = .04). Mean years in practice for female directors (13.9 ± 6.8) was less than that of male directors (20.3 ± 9.4, P < .0001). Similarly, mean h-index for female directors (11 ± 7.2) was lower than for males (17.5 ± 12.5, P = .0001). After controlling for academic rank and years of practice in a multivariable regression, the h-index remained lower for women than for men (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Women are disproportionately underrepresented in positions of residency and fellowship directorships, and chair positions, consistent with other specialties. Women in leadership had lower academic ranks, fewer years of practice, and lower h-indices than their male counterparts. This may represent a shift in academic otolaryngology as female otolaryngologists seek early involvement in leadership. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:1664-1669, 2020.

Toward Gender Equity in Critical Care Medicine: A Qualitative Study of Perceived Drivers, Implications, and Strategies.

OBJECTIVES: Critical care medicine is a medical specialty where women remain underrepresented relative to men. The purpose of this study was to explore perceived drivers (i.e., influencing factors) and implications (i.e., associated consequences) of gender inequity in critical care medicine and determine strategies to attract and retain women. DESIGN: Qualitative interview-based study. SETTING: We recruited participants from the 13 Canadian Universities with adult critical care medicine training programs. PARTICIPANTS: We invited all faculty members (clinical and academic) and trainees to participate in a semistructured telephone interview and purposely aimed to recruit two faculty members (one woman and one man) and one trainee from each site. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and two investigators conducted thematic analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three-hundred seventy-one faculty members (20% women, 80% men) and 105 trainees (28% women, 72% men) were invited to participate, 48 participants were required to achieve saturation. Participants unanimously described critical care medicine as a specialty practiced predominantly by men. Most women described experiences of being personally or professionally impacted by gender inequity in their group. Postulated drivers of the gender gap included institutional and interpersonal factors. Mentorship programs that span institutions, targeted policies to support family planning, and opportunities for modified role descriptions were common strategies suggested to attract and retain women. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified a gender gap in critical care medicine and provided important insight into the impact for personal, professional, and group dynamics. Recommended improvement strategies are feasible, map broadly onto reported drivers and implications, and are applicable to critical care medicine and more broadly throughout medical specialties.

Twelve tips for developing and running a successful women's group in international academic medicine.

Gender inequity in academic medicine remains an important issue worldwide. While institutional programs and policies can help promote equity in recruitment, retention, scholarship, promotion, and leadership, they often do not address the physical and social isolation that many women in international academic medicine face. Creating networking opportunities through building women's groups can provide a personal and professional support structure that decreases isolation and promotes the advancement of women. Based on a multidisciplinary literature review on change processes, group formation, and women's empowerment, as well as lessons learned from personal experience, we offer 12 tips to successfully create, maintain, and support physician women's groups, employing Kotter's change-management framework. We believe that these groups can provide a structured platform for networking opportunities to advance women physicians in academic medicine worldwide.

Striving for Gender Equity in Academic Medicine Careers: A Call to Action.

Women represent approximately half of students entering medical schools and more than half of those entering PhD programs. When advancing through the academic and professional fields, however, women continually face barriers that men do not. In this Commentary, the authors offer ideas for coordinating the efforts of organizations, academic institutions, and leaders throughout the scientific and medical professions to reduce barriers that result in inequities and, instead, strive for gender parity. Specific areas of focus outlined by the authors include facilitating women's access to formal and informal professional networks, acknowledging and addressing the gender pay gap as well as the lack of research funding awarded to women in the field, and updating workplace policies that have not evolved to accommodate women's lifestyles. As academic institutions seek access to top talent and the means to develop those individuals capable of generating the change medicine and science needs, the authors urge leaders and change agents within academic medicine to address the systemic barriers to gender equity that impede us from achieving the mission to improve the health of all.

An Integrated Framework for Gender Equity in Academic Medicine.

In 2008, the National Institutes of Health funded 14 R01 grants to study causal factors that promote and support women's biomedical careers. The Research Partnership on Women in Biomedical Careers, a multi-institutional collaboration of the investigators, is one product of this initiative.A comprehensive framework is needed to address change at many levels-department, institution, academic community, and beyond-and enable gender equity in the development of successful biomedical careers. The authors suggest four distinct but interrelated aspects of culture conducive to gender equity: equal access to resources and opportunities, minimizing unconscious gender bias, enhancing work-life balance, and leadership engagement. They review the collection of eight articles in this issue, which each address one or more of the four dimensions of culture. The articles suggest that improving mentor-mentee fit, coaching grant reviewers on unconscious bias, and providing equal compensation and adequate resources for career development will contribute positively to gender equity in academic medicine.Academic medicine must adopt an integrated perspective on culture for women and acknowledge the multiple facets essential to gender equity. To effect change, culture must be addressed both within and beyond academic health centers (AHCs). Leaders within AHCs must examine their institutions' processes, resources, and assessment for fairness and transparency; mobilize personnel and financial resources to implement evidence-based initiatives; and assign accountability for providing transparent progress assessments. Beyond AHCs, organizations must examine their operations and implement change to ensure parity of funding, research, and leadership opportunities as well as transparency of assessment and accreditation.

Understanding the Barriers to Hiring and Promoting Women in Surgical Subspecialties.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to characterize potential disparities in academic output, NIH-funding, and academic rank between male and female surgical faculty and identify subspecialties in which these differences may be more pronounced. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty metrics for 4,015 faculty members at the top-55 NIH-funded departments of surgery were collected. Demographic characteristics, NIH funding details, and scholarly output were analyzed. A new metric, academic velocity (V), reflecting recent citations is defined. RESULTS: Overall, 21.5% of surgical faculty are women. The percentage of female faculty is highest in science/research (41%) and surgical oncology (34%), and lowest in cardiothoracic surgery (9%). Female faculty are less likely to be full professors (22.7% vs 41.2%) and division chiefs (6.2% vs 13.6%). The fraction of women who are full professors is lowest in cardiothoracic surgery. Overall median numbers of publications/citations are lower for female faculty compared with male surgical faculty (21 of 364 vs 43 of 723, p < 0.001), and these differences are more pronounced for assistant professors. Current/previous NIH funding (21.3% vs 24%, p = NS) rates are similar between women and men, and surgical departments with more female full professors have higher NIH funding ranking (R(2) = 0.14, p < 0.05). In certain subspecialties, female associate and full professors outperform male counterparts. Overall, female authors have higher numbers of more recent citations. CONCLUSIONS: Subspecialty involvement and academic performance differences by sex vary greatly by subspecialty type and are most pronounced at the assistant professor level. Identification of potential barriers for entry of women into certain subspecialties, causes for the observed lower number of publications/citations among female assistant professors, and obstacles for attaining leadership roles need to be determined. We propose a new metric for assessment of publications/citations that can offset the effects of seniority differences between male and female faculty members.

[Presence of women in management bodies of the professional associations of the field of health in 2015]. / Presencia de las mujeres en los órganos de dirección de los colegios profesionales del ámbito de la salud en 2015.

BACKGROUND: The gradual increase of women in the health professions does not correspond with her presence in positions of power. Given that professional colleges have an essential role in the representation and professional regulation, arises as an aim to describe the presence of women in the managerial structures of the professional colleges of health in Spain now to verify the degree of compliance with the criteria of parity. METHODS: The Spanish official professionals' colleges were compiled by visiting the websites of the General Council of the Psychology of Spain, General Council of Medical Associations of Spain, General Council of Colleges of Nursing of Spain, General Council of Physiotherapists Schools of Spain, General Dental Council, Organization collegiate Pharmaceutical General and Council of Associations of Podiatrists. All their webs were visited. The sex of the presidency, the executive and the entire board was identified. Data were analyzed according to the overall percentage of women and profession. We compared this to the INE-2014 collegiate professionals. RESULTS: Out of 251 professionals' colleges in July-2015, 21, 91% had a female president. Women hold 34,69% of the executive positions and 42,80% of total boards. 11, 32% of Medical colleges had a female president and 43,48% of Nursing ones. The Psychology are those with more women in the presidency, 45, 83%. CONCLUSION: There is no parity, being higher in Psychology and Nursing and, much lower in Dentistry, Physiotherapy, Podiatry and Medicine. It decreases with the responsibility level. Health Inequality.

Increasing women in leadership in global health.

Globally, women experience a disproportionate burden of disease and death due to inequities in access to basic health care, nutrition, and education. In the face of this disparity, it is striking that leadership in the field of global health is highly skewed towards men and that global health organizations neglect the issue of gender equality in their own leadership. Randomized trials demonstrate that women in leadership positions in governmental organizations implement different policies than men and that these policies are more supportive of women and children. Other studies show that proactive interventions to increase the proportion of women in leadership positions within businesses or government can be successful. Therefore, the authors assert that increasing female leadership in global health is both feasible and a fundamental step towards addressing the problem of women's health. In this Perspective, the authors contrast the high proportion of young female trainees who are interested in academic global health early in their careers with the low numbers of women successfully rising to global health leadership roles. The authors subsequently explore reasons for female attrition from the field of global health and offer practical strategies for closing the gender gap in global health leadership. The authors propose solutions aimed to promote female leaders from both resource-wealthy and resource-poor countries, including leadership training grants, mentorship from female leaders in global professions, strengthening health education in resource-poor countries, research-enabling grants, and altering institutional policies to support women choosing a global health career path.

Geographic mobility advances careers: study of the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM) program for women.

PURPOSE: To explore whether geographic mobility is associated with career advancement of women in U.S. medical schools who are entering mid- to executive-level positions. METHOD: Using an existing dataset of 351 participants in academic medicine who attended the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM) Program for Women (1996-2005) (adjusted to 345 participants in some analyses because data on initial faculty rank were missing), the authors conducted a quantitative study in 2009 to determine whether geographic mobility was associated with administrative promotion for those who relocated geographically (from employer while attending ELAM to employer at last job of record). RESULTS: Twenty-four percent of women (83/345) relocated geographically (movers) after attending ELAM. Moving had a positive association with career advancement (P = .001); odds for promotion were 168% higher for movers than for stayers [odds ratio Exp(ß) = 2.684]. Movers attained higher administrative positions (P = .003), and more movers (60%) were promoted at the most recent job compared with stayers (40%) (P = .0001). Few movers changed city size; 70% already resided in large or urban cities where most medical schools are located. Age was not a barrier to mobility. Career advancement was not related to research reputation (National Institutes of Health grant award ranking) of participants' schools (either at time of attending ELAM or post-ELAM). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to findings outside academic medicine, 24% of women classified as geographic "movers" among midcareer faculty in medical schools attained career advantages. Psychosocial and socioeconomic factors underlying women's relocation decisions require additional study.

Women in surgery: little change in gender equality in Japanese medical societies over the past 3 years.

Japan lags behind other industrialized nations in terms of gender equality. To improve the work environment for surgeons, the opinions of female surgeons must be respected. The Committee on Women Surgeons of the Japan Surgical Society (JSS) conducted two surveys 3 years apart of the numbers of female councilors and directors in the member societies of the Japanese Association of Medical Sciences. In the nonsurgical medical societies, although there was an increase in the number of female councilors, only one female director was named over the past 3 years. On the other hand, there were no female directors in any of the 12 surgical societies in 2011. The JSS was founded in 1899. No female surgeon has ever been elected as director and there are currently no female councilors due to the new election system. The Gender Equality Bureau of the Cabinet Office should therefore provide greater support to improve gender equality in Japan.