Recruit Profiles Across the U.S. Armed Forces: Implications for Increasing Gender Integration in Recruit Training.

INTRODUCTION: This article uses recent survey data from a study on gender integration at recruit training across the U.S. Armed Forces to examine service, gender, and training differences in recruit's gender attitudes, beliefs, and cohesion metrics. In addition to providing a descriptive understanding of our recruit sample, this article examines factors germane to gender integration at recruit training such as gender attitudes, sexist beliefs, and unit cohesion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article uses data from a survey of U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Coast Guard recruits as part of a USMC-commissioned study to develop alternate models and recommendations for increasing gender integration in USMC recruit training. At all sites but the USMC, recruits completed the survey 1 to 2 weeks before graduation. At the Marine Corps Recruit Depots, recruits participated in the survey at the beginning (week 2) and end (week 11) of their 13-week training cycle. A 19-question survey captured sociodemographic information, perspectives and experiences during recruit training, and gender attitudes and beliefs. Analyses were conducted on the sample with complete data on the measures reported, including those USMC recruits observed at both week 2 and week 11 (n = 629). Descriptive statistics (percentage) were calculated for all categorical outcome variables. Outcome variables (cohesion, gender, and sexism attitudes) were compared between groups using chi-squared tests or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate. RESULTS: Recruits differed significantly across services in perceptions of unit cohesion on 3 of the 4 indicators: Platoon members are cooperative, know they can depend on each other, and really respect each other (P < .05). These differences appear to be driven by female recruit difference across service. They reported significant differences in gender role attitudes across the services, with USMC recruits being most likely to endorse traditional gender roles compared to other service recruits. Male USMC recruits were significantly more likely than their female peers to agree that men should achieve outside the home and women should take care of the home and family (21.3% versus 6.3%, P < .05). The only statistical differences in attitudes about equality of treatment and opportunity among recruits were between male and female USMC recruits. All items capturing sexist attitudes elicited statistically significant differences between male USMC recruits and male recruits in other services (P < .05). There were significant differences in all sexism measures between male and female USMC recruits (P < .05). There is a significant decline in some sexist attitudes between weeks 2 and 11 of training among male USMC recruits (P < .05). Nearly one-half to three-fourths of male USMC recruits hold sexist attitudes, even near the end of recruit training. CONCLUSIONS: The disparate gender and sexism attitudes of male USMC recruits compared with their peers in other services, and their fellow female USMC recruits suggest efforts to increase gender integration at entry-level training are needed, but also may be challenging since male USMC recruits report the highest levels of sexist attitudes among all recruits.

Recruit Perspectives on Gender Integration at Recruit Training: A Comparison by Service and Gender.

INTRODUCTION: Recruit training is the initial entry for enlisted personnel in the military. The Services execute gender-integrated recruit training differently. The U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) maintains same-gender platoons led by same-gender drill instructors in integrated companies; further integration occurs at select training events. The other Services train recruits in gender-integrated units with mixed-gender drill instructor teams. We examine recruits' experiences and perceptions of gender integration at recruit training, their desired level of integration, and preferences for increasing gender integration, comparing by Service and gender. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Recruit perspectives and experiences were captured in a 19-question survey (n = 632) and 90-min focus groups (n = 260) near graduation from recruit training. Data were collected from June to November 2021. Because of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic restrictions, the Navy and Air Force were not conducting gender-integrated recruit training during data collection. Outcome variables were compared cross-Service by gender and within Service by gender using chi-squared tests or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate; focus group data were analyzed using initial and secondary coding schemes. Three USMC training models, varied by level of integration, were also analyzed (Male-Only, Series Track, and Integrated Company). RESULTS: Significant gender differences across and within Service emerged in recruits' experience being trained by an opposite-gender instructor. Male recruits had significant differences by Service (P < .001), and USMC female recruits reported being trained by male instructors more than their male peers by female instructors (Series Track P = .002; Integrated Company P < .001). In the focus groups, recruits described common differences with how men and women embodied being a drill instructor. Significant gender differences across (both male and female P < .001) and within Service were reported for closeness of training with opposite-gender peers (Air Force P = .028; U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) Integrated Company P = .010; Army P = .048), an expected finding given varied integration during data collection. Male and female recruits had significant differences by Service in their preference for integration at the lowest unit level (both male and female P < .001), with those who experienced integrated training showing higher levels of endorsement. In the focus groups, recruits articulated benefits and challenges of gender-integrated recruit training. Significant gender differences across Service emerged in preferences for more integration in specific training activities. Within Service, female USMC Integrated Company recruits wanted more integration in tactical/field, physical fitness, and classroom training than their male peers (P < .001 for all). In the focus groups, USMC recruits of both genders desired more integrated training events, particularly those involving combat and tactical skill development. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided an opportunity to examine recruit perspectives on gender-integrated training. Services valuing opposite-gender instructor exposure in recruit training must ensure that male recruits are being taught and led by female instructors given disproportionate demographics. Recruits who experienced integrated training were more supportive of integration, indicating that this experience may increase their support for gender-integrated training units and environments. Today's recruits understand that they are entering gender-integrated working environments, and our results indicate that they expect recruit training to mirror that reality.

The Role of Drill Instructors and Gender Integration at Recruit Training: Examining Intersections of Gender and Integration in the Recruit Training Environment.

INTRODUCTION: Drill instructors (DIs) are responsible for executing their Services' recruit training programs and for training recruits. DIs assume a variety of roles, including teaching and developing practical skills and knowledge, mentoring, modeling appropriate behavior and attitudes, motivating recruits for success during and after recruit training, applying and instilling discipline, and ensuring the safety and welfare of recruits. This article examines two major research questions at the intersection of gender, gender-integrated training, and the DI role: (1) What differences exist in how DIs experience their role by gender? and (2) how does gender-integrated recruit training affect DIs' approach to training? MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article draws from 87 semistructured interviews conducted with Service leaders, training cadre, and DIs in service of a broader Marine Corps interdisciplinary study on gender integration at recruit training. Interviews were conducted virtually and in-person with Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard personnel from June to November 2021. Each interview was coded with initial and secondary codes developed through a flexible coding approach. Data were analyzed across and within relevant categories such as gender and Service to identify themes and patterns. RESULTS: Although the DI role was universally described as demanding and difficult, unique challenges for women consistently emerged from the data. The top reported challenges faced by female DIs were personnel shortages, work and family conflict, culture-driven sexism in the training environment from male peers and recruits, and pressure to excel above and beyond their male peers. In recruit training, DIs are responsible for executing gender-integrated practices. Service leaders, training cadre, and DIs described how gender integration practices affect their approach to the role and implementation of training, including addressing and dismantling sexism, shutting down recruit romantic relationships, training all recruits in an equal manner, knowing gender-specific grooming standards, increasing communication among DIs, and working with mixed-gender DI teams. CONCLUSIONS: Female DIs face additional challenges in and outside the role compared with their male peers, and some of these challenges are preventable. Staffing and personnel issues plague the female DI population and are a persistent and pervasive challenge to gender integration efforts. Women are a necessary and highly desirable population to fill the DI role, particularly as Services aim to expose recruits to leaders of both genders during their critical first training experience. DIs play an important role in ensuring the successful completion of recruit training, ultimately helping to build the future leaders of the military. The success of gender integration efforts depends on DIs' intentional approach to the process. Future research can build on this work by expanding the scope to other military training environments (beyond recruit training) and examining how DIs' own sociodemographic positions (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation) inform their perspective on and approach to equity in the training environment.

Design Considerations for a Multidisciplinary Approach to Provide Policy Recommendations on Gender-Integrated Recruit Training in the Marine Corps.

INTRODUCTION: Recruit training is designed to transform civilians into physically fit military service members, who embody their service's core values and possess military discipline and skills. At the time this research began, the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) remained the only service that segregated recruits by gender at the lowest unit level (e.g., platoon) and employed gender-segregated drill instructor teams. USMC's Marine Corps Recruit Depots (MCRD) must comply with a 2020 Congressional Mandate to not segregate training by gender in Parris Island by 2025 and San Diego by 2028. In turn, USMC requested an independent scientific study to analyze current approaches to gender integration at recruit training to propose alternate models and other policy recommendations that increase gender integration while maintaining current USMC standards. The Marine Corps is currently evaluating alternate models and recommendations to optimize entry-level training. This article outlines considerations for choosing the optimal research study design, research methods, and types of data collected in a study intended to provide policy recommendations on gender-integrated recruit training for the USMC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Research data were collected during visits to the MCRDs and selected recruit training locations for the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Coast Guard. Data collection on USMC recruits from three cohorts involved social science assessments (focus groups and surveys) and human performance testing (countermovement jumps and isometric mid-thigh pulls, sleep and activity wearables, and cortisol data) at multiple points in the training cycle. Data on recruits from the sister services were limited to social science assessments. Approximately 600 recruits between the two MCRDs and 160 recruits from the sister services participated in the study during a 7-month timeframe in 2021. The research team conducted extensive ethnographic observations of recruit training at all selected research sites and interviewed training cadre, drill instructors, and service leadership responsible for recruit training (∼90 interviews). Additionally, the research team interviewed 20 experts on gender integration or recruit training who possessed alternate viewpoints from the current USMC practice. RESULTS: The mixed methods study was designed to assess the current gender integration practices at recruit training across the services to generate alternative models of gender integration for USMC. The research team developed a set of multidisciplinary objectives and research questions serving as the foundation of the research study design and data collection process. The study was designed to collect qualitative, quantitative, and administrative data informed by social science and human performance disciplines. To ensure that all aspects and implications relevant to gender integration were considered, select data were collected across services and with stakeholders at all levels. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary research approach provided a comprehensive picture of the current USMC recruit training models. The research team captured multiple perspectives and data points for analysis through an expansive view on gender integration across all services, by interacting with participants at all levels of the institutions in varied ways. The information and data gathered enabled the research team to establish objective, data-driven alternate models, and recommendations for enhancing gender integration at recruit training for the USMC.

Geographic Location and Corporate Ownership of Hospitals in Relation to Unfilled Positions in the 2023 Emergency Medicine Match.

Introduction: In the 2023 National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match, there were 554 unfilled emergency medicine (EM) positions before the Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP). We sought to describe features of EM programs that participated in the match and the association between select program characteristics and unfilled positions. Methods: The primary outcome measures included the proportion of positions filled in relation to state and population density, hospital ownership type, and physician employment model. Secondary outcome measures included comparing program-specific attributes between filled and unfilled programs, including original accreditation type, year of original accreditation, the total number of approved training positions, length of training, urban-rural designation, hospital size by number of beds, resident-to-bed ratio, and the percentage of disproportionate share patients seen. Results: The NRMP Match had 276 unique participating EM programs with 554 unfilled positions. Six states offered 52% of the total NRMP positions available. Five states were associated with two-thirds of the unfilled positions. Public hospitals had a statistically significant higher match rate (88%) when compared to non-profit and for-profit hospitals, which had match rates of 80% and 75%, respectively (P < 0.001). Programs with faculty employed by a health system had the highest match rate of 87%, followed by clinician partnerships at 79% and private equity groups at 68% (P < 0.001 overall and between all subgroups). Conclusion: The 2023 match in EM saw increased rates in the number of residency positions and programs that did not fill before the SOAP. Public hospitals had higher match rates than for-profit or non-profit hospitals. Residency programs that employed academic faculty through the hospital or health system were associated with higher match rates.

Occupational health screening during Gurkha Central Selection: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The selection process to the British Army's Brigade of Gurkhas is rigorous, demanding and competitive. The ethos of recruitment to the Gurkhas is grounded in an overarching tenant: that selection is free, fair and transparent. The aim of this study was to retrospectively review reasons for potential recruits (PRs) to be deemed medically unsuitable or deferred suitability on medical grounds for selection to the Brigade of Gurkhas. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted by extracted data from published post-exercise reports for the past four years to ascertain numbers of PRs deemed medically fit, medically unsuitable or deferred suitability on medical grounds. The International Classification of Disease version 11 (ICD-11) codes were retrospectively assigned to code medical reasons for non-progression. Rates of medical non-progression were compared by year. RESULTS: A total of 3154 PRs were analysed between 2018 and 2021. There was no significant difference between PRs deemed medically fit and those deemed medically suitable or deferred on medical grounds over the study period (p=0.351). There was a significant difference in the ratio of PRs deferred on medical grounds and those deemed medically unsuitable over the study period (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Selection to the Gurkhas is extremely competitive. These data demonstrate that, overall, reasons for medical deferral or unsuitability have remained constant despite the impact of a global pandemic. These data reinforce the central tenant of Gurkha selection; that it continues to be free, fair, and transparent.

Outcomes of the Main Residency Match for Applicants With Disability.

This cohort study assesses match rates of US applicants with and without disability into specialty residence programs.

Effect of United States Medical Licensing Examination Score Cutoffs on Recruitment of Underrepresented Applicants in the Urology Match.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the use of United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) score cutoffs during the screening process of the Urology Residency Match Program may affect recruitment of applicants who are underrepresented in medicine (URM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Deidentified data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC) Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) system was reviewed, representing all applicants to our institution's urology residency program from 2018 to 2022. We analyzed self-reported demographic variables including race/ethnicity, age, sex/gender, as well as USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores. Chi-square tests and ANOVA were used to determine the association between race/ethnicity and other sociodemographic factors and academic metrics. Applicants were stratified according to USMLE Step 1 cutoff scores and the distribution of applicants by race/ethnicity was assessed using a Gaussian nonlinear regression fit. RESULTS: A total of 1258 applicants submitted applications to our program during the 5-year period, including 872 males (69.3%) and 386 females (30.7%). Most applicants were White (43.5%), followed by Asian (28.3%), Hispanic/Latino (11.7%), and Black (7.0%). There was an association between race/ethnicity and USMLE scores. Median USMLE Step 1 scores for White, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, and Black applicants were 242, 242, 237, and 232, respectively (P < .001). As cutoff score increases, percentage of URM applicants decreases. CONCLUSION: The use of cutoffs based on USMLE scores disproportionately affects URM applicants. Transitioning from numeric scores to pass/fail may enhance holistic review processes and increase the representation of URM applicants offered interviews at urology residency programs.

Virtual Signaling and Emerging Trends in its Use Across Surgical Specialties.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate program signaling in surgical specialties, analyze its influence on residency applications, and provide recommendations for enhancing its consistency and effectiveness. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed AAMC ERAS data from the 2021 to 2022 and 2023 residency match cycles, focusing on surgical specialties including general surgery, neurological surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, and orthopedic surgery. RESULTS: A positive correlation existed between the number of signals received and the number of applicants to a program across 4 surgical specialties. 10% of programs in each specialty received between 17% and 28% of all signals. There was a negative correlation between the number of current DO residents at a program and the number of signals received. Amongst surgical specialties, those with more signals per applicant had a more equitable distribution of signals across competitive programs. University programs received the most signals, programs were less likely to receive signals if they had a higher percentage of DO residents, and IMG applicants were less likely to send signals. CONCLUSION: Specialties with more signals per applicant had a more equitable distribution of signals across competitive programs, and university programs received proportionally more signals than community programs. Further research is required to investigate the disparities in signaling and the impact of signaling on successful matching.

Relationship between self-reported and objectively measured physical fitness in young men and women.

Self-reported physical fitness has advantages in cost and time over objective methods, but previous studies demonstrate equivocal conclusions regarding validity. Methods for self-reporting are usually based on subjective judgements, while another approach includes performing field tests at home. The Norwegian military relies on the latter method for conscript selection, but its validity is unknown and should be investigated. In total 14,166 young men and women were included in the study. During conscript selection step one, the subjects were requested to perform 3,000 m run, push-up, pull-up and standing long jump tests at home, and report the results online ("self-reported measurements"). Step two took place at a conscript selection centre 1-18 months later. Here, the subjects completed a maximal treadmill test, seated medicine ball throw, pull-up and standing long jump tests ("objective measurements"). The results demonstrated correlation coefficients from 0.29 to 0.82 (P < 0.05) for self-reported vs. objective measurements, with the highest association found for self-reported and objectively measured pull-ups. Kappa values ranged from 0.05 to 0.34 (P < 0.05), with pull-ups demonstrating the highest agreement. More women than men over-reported their physical fitness. Among men and women indicating similar self-reported fitness, men's objective fitness was higher for all objective tests (effect sizes from 0.5 to 3.0). In conclusion, large variations in correlation coefficients were observed between self-reported and objectively measured physical fitness, while the kappa values indicated poor to fair agreement. The finding that more women than men over-reported their fitness level contradicts most previous studies.Highlights Low, moderate, and high correlations, and poor to fair agreements (kappa values), were observed between self-reported and objectively measured endurance and muscle strength variables.More women than men overreported their actual fitness level.Self-reported fitness based on performing field tests at home may be a feasible alternative to traditional methods which rely on self-perceived fitness.

Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention.

Faculty hiring and retention determine the composition of the US academic workforce and directly shape educational outcomes1, careers2, the development and spread of ideas3 and research priorities4,5. However, hiring and retention are dynamic, reflecting societal and academic priorities, generational turnover and efforts to diversify the professoriate along gender6-8, racial9 and socioeconomic10 lines. A comprehensive study of the structure and dynamics of the US professoriate would elucidate the effects of these efforts and the processes that shape scholarship more broadly. Here we analyse the academic employment and doctoral education of tenure-track faculty at all PhD-granting US universities over the decade 2011-2020, quantifying stark inequalities in faculty production, prestige, retention and gender. Our analyses show universal inequalities in which a small minority of universities supply a large majority of faculty across fields, exacerbated by patterns of attrition and reflecting steep hierarchies of prestige. We identify markedly higher attrition rates among faculty trained outside the United States or employed by their doctoral university. Our results indicate that gains in women's representation over this decade result from demographic turnover and earlier changes made to hiring, and are unlikely to lead to long-term gender parity in most fields. These analyses quantify the dynamics of US faculty hiring and retention, and will support efforts to improve the organization, composition and scholarship of the US academic workforce.