Changing gender gap and practice patterns in reproductive endocrinology and infertility subspecialists in the United States: a Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility report.

OBJECTIVE: To identify changes in current practice patterns, salaries, and satisfaction by gender and by years in practice among board-certified reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) subspecialists in the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional web-based survey including 37 questions conducted by the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome measures were total compensation and practice patterns compared by gender and the type of practice. The secondary outcomes included demographics, the number of in vitro fertilization cycles, surgeries performed, and the morale of survey respondents. RESULT(S): There were 370 respondents (48.4% women and 51.4% men). Compared with a similar survey conducted 6 years earlier, a 27% increase in the number of female respondents was observed in this survey. There was a marginally significant trend toward lower compensation for female than male REI subspecialists (17% lower, $472,807 vs. $571,969). The gap was seen for responders with ≥10 years' experience, which is also when there was the largest gap between private and academic practice (mean $820,997 vs, $391,600). Most (77%) felt positively about the current state of the reproductive endocrinology field, and >90% would choose the subspecialty again. CONCLUSION(S): There has been a substantial increase in the number of recent female REI subspecialists showing less disparity in compensation, and the gap appears to be closing. There is an increasing gap in compensation between private and academic practices with ≥5 years of experience. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility remains a high morale specialty.

Disparities in Physician Compensation by Gender in Ontario, Canada.

Importance: Men and women should earn equal pay for equal work. An examination of the magnitude of pay disparities could inform strategies for remediation. Objective: To examine gender-based differences in pay within a large, comprehensive physician population practicing within a variety of payment systems. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) in the 2017 to 2018 fiscal year to estimate differences in gross payments between men and women physicians in Ontario, Canada. Pay gaps were calculated annually and daily. Regression analyses were used to control for observable practice characteristics that could account for individual differences in daily pay. In Canada's largest province, Ontario, medical services are predominantly provided by self-employed physicians who bill the province's single payer, OHIP. All physicians who submitted claims to OHIP were included. Data were analyzed from January 2020 to July 2021. Exposures: Physician gender, obtained from the OHIP Corporate Provider Database. Gender is recorded as male or female. Main Outcomes and Measures: Gross clinical payments were tabulated for individual physicians on a daily and annual basis in conjunction with each physician's practice characteristics, setting, and specialty. Results: A total of 31 481 physicians were included in the study sample (12 604 [40.0%] women; 18 877 [60.0%] men; mean [SD] time since graduation, 23.3 [13.6] years), representing 99% of active physicians in Ontario. The unadjusted differences in clinical payments between male and female physicians were 32.8% (95% CI, 30.8%-34.6%) annually and 22.5% (95% CI, 21.2%-23.8%) daily. After accounting for practice characteristics, region, and specialty, the overall daily payment gap was 13.5% (95% CI, 12.3%-14.8%). The pay gap persisted with differing magnitudes when examined by specialty (ranging from 6.6% to 37.6%), practice setting (8.3% to 17.2%), payment model (13.4% to 22.8% for family medicine; 8.0% to 11.6% for other specialties), and rurality (8.0% to 16.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study examined differences in magnitude of annual and daily payment gaps and between unadjusted and adjusted gaps. Comparing the gaps for different specialties, geography, and payment systems illustrated the complexity of the issue by showing that the pay gap varied for physicians in different practice settings. As such, multiple directed interventions will be necessary to ensure that all physicians are paid equally for equal work, regardless of gender.

Gender Differences in Compensation in Anesthesiology in the United States: Results of a National Survey of Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: A gender-based compensation gap among physicians is well documented. Even after adjusting for age, experience, work hours, productivity, and academic rank, the gender gap remained and widened over the course of a physician's career. This study aimed to examine if a significant gender pay gap still existed for anesthesiologists in the United States. METHODS: In 2018, we surveyed 28,812 physician members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists to assess the association of compensation with gender and to identify possible causes of wage disparities. Gender was the primary variable examined in the model, and compensation by gender was the primary outcome. Compensation was defined as the amount reported as direct compensation on a W-2, 1099, or K-1, plus all voluntary salary reductions (eg, 401[k], health insurance). The survey directed respondents to include salary, bonuses, incentive payments, research stipends, honoraria, and distribution of profits to employees. Respondents had the option of providing a point estimate of their compensation or selecting a range in $50,000 increments. Potential confounding variables that could affect compensation were identified based on a scoping literature review and the consensus expertise of the authors. We fitted a generalized ordinal logistic regression with 7 ranges of compensation. For the sensitivity analyses, we used linear regressions of log-transformed compensation based on respondent point estimates and imputed values. RESULTS: The final analytic sample consisted of 2081 observations (response rate, 7.2%). This sample represented a higher percentage of women and younger physicians compared to the demographic makeup of anesthesiologists in the United States. The adjusted odds ratio associated with gender equal to woman was an estimated 0.44 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.53), indicating that for a given compensation range, women had a 56% lower odds than men of being in a higher compensation range. Sensitivity analyses found the relative percentage difference in compensation for women compared to men ranged from -8.3 to -8.9. In the sensitivity analysis based on the subset of respondents (n = 1036) who provided a point estimate of compensation, the relative percentage difference (-8.3%; 95% confidence interval, -4.7 to -11.7) reflected a $32,617 lower compensation for women than men, holding other covariates at their means. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation for anesthesiologists showed a significant pay gap that was associated with gender even after adjusting for potential confounding factors, including age, hours worked, geographic practice region, practice type, position, and job selection criteria.

Equal pay for equal work: Disparities in compensation in vascular surgery.

Physician compensation varies by specialty, gender, race, years in practice, type of practice, location, and individual productivity. We reviewed the disparities in compensation regarding the variation between medical and surgical specialties, between academic and private practice, between gender, race, and rank, and by practice location. The physician personal debt perspective was also considered to quantify the effect of disparities in compensation. Strategies toward eliminating the pay gap include salary transparency, pay equity audit, paid parental leave, mentoring, sponsorship, leadership, and promotion pathways. Pay parity is important because paying women less than men contributes to the gender pay gap, lowers pension contributions, and results in higher relative poverty in retirement. Pay parity will also affect motivation and relationships at work, ultimately contributing to a diverse workforce and business success. Rewarding all employees fairly is the right thing to do. As surgeons and leaders in medicine, establishing pay equity is a matter of ethical principle and integrity to further elevate our profession.

Gender-Based Pay Discrimination in Otolaryngology.

Male and female otolaryngologists all attend the same accredited medical schools, complete the same accredited residency programs, and take the same board certification exams; however, female otolaryngologist are paid 77 cents on the dollar compared to their male colleagues. Even after accounting for age, experience, faculty rank, research productivity, and clinical revenue, significant gender pay gaps exist across all professor levels. The goal of this review is to improve our understanding of how and why the gender pay gap and discrimination exists, the harm caused by tolerance of policies that perpetuate gender pay inequity, and what is and can be done to correct gender-based pay gaps and discrimination. The review presents the current status of gender pay inequity in the United States and reports on how otolaryngology compares to other professions both within and outside of healthcare. The gender pay gap is shown to have a negative impact on economic growth, institutional reputation and financial success, retention and recruitment of faculty, and patient care. Many historically incorrect reasons used to explain the causes of the gender pay gap, including that women work less, have less research productivity, or produce lower-quality care, have been be disproved by evaluation of current research. Potential causes of gender pay inequities, such as gender bias, organization culture, fear of retaliation, promotions inequalities, lack of transparency, and senior leadership not being held accountable for equity and diversity concerns, will be explored. Finally, examples of best practices to achieve pay equity will be presented. Laryngoscope, 131:989-995, 2021.

The prevalence and impact of gender bias and sexual discrimination in orthopaedics, and mitigating strategies.

AIMS: Gender bias and sexual discrimination (GBSD) have been widely recognized across a range of fields and are now part of the wider social consciousness. Such conduct can occur in the medical workplace, with detrimental effects on recipients. The aim of this review was to identify the prevalence and impact of GBSD in orthopaedic surgery, and to investigate interventions countering such behaviours. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline, EMCARE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library Database in April 2020, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to which we adhered. Original research papers pertaining to the prevalence and impact of GBSD, or mitigating strategies, within orthopaedics were included for review. RESULTS: Of 570 papers, 27 were eligible for inclusion. These were published between 1998 and 2020. A narrative review was performed in light of the significant heterogeneity displayed by the eligible studies. A total of 13 papers discussed the prevalence of GBSD, while 13 related to the impact of these behaviours, and six discussed mitigating strategies. GBSD was found to be common in the orthopaedic workplace, with all sources showing women to be the subjects. The impact of this includes poor workforce representation, lower salaries, and less career success, including in academia, for women in orthopaedics. Mitigating strategies in the literature are focused on providing female role models, mentors, and educational interventions. CONCLUSION: GBSD is common in orthopaedic surgery, with a substantial impact on sufferers. A small number of mitigating strategies have been tested but these are limited in their scope. As such, the orthopaedic community is obliged to participate in more thoughtful and proactive strategies that mitigate against GBSD, by improving female recruitment and retention within the specialty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1446-1456.

Reexamining the persisting wage gap between male and female PAs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the magnitude of any difference in total compensation between male and female physician assistants (PAs) after controlling for personal and workplace factors related to compensation. METHODS: Using data from the 2019 AAPA Salary Survey, the authors conducted a sequential regression analysis to examine the relationship between a variety of personal and practice demographics and total compensation. RESULTS: After controlling for compensation-related factors, a wage gap between male and female PAs persisted: female PAs were paid almost $0.93 for every $1 male PAs were paid in the first year of work ($9,010 less). This wage gap widened by $201 for every year of work experience. CONCLUSIONS: A wage gap between male and female PAs persists even after including all compensation types and controlling for compensation-related factors that may differ between male and female PAs. Proposed policy implications could begin to mitigate the gap.

Optometry Compensation Study: Narrowing Down the Unexplained Gender Wage Gap in Optometry.

SIGNIFICANCE: Men earn at least 6.5% more than women in their first full-time jobs as optometrists. For current salaries, the gender wage gap is more than 13%. This study details the gender wage gap that remains after controlling for practice ownership, residency training, and employer-defined full-time work. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure the gender wage gap by region and practice type for full-time optometrists who did not complete a residency and do not own their practice. METHODS: Participants completed an online survey, providing data for their first and current optometry positions and demographic information. Respondents who reported full-time employment in the United States, not completing a residency, and not owning their practice were selected for further analysis by census region and practice type. In each category, the gender wage gap was calculated. RESULTS: In all regions and practice types, men were paid higher starting salaries than women. For current salaries, men were paid higher in almost all regions and practice types. The wage gap increased from starting salary to current salary, although not in all regions and practice types. CONCLUSIONS: When practice ownership, residency completion, and full-time work are controlled for, there remains a difference in the pay received by men and women in optometry. The salary data presented in this study may help optometrists narrow the wage gap.

Salary Disparities in Academic Urogynecology: Despite Increased Transparency, Men Still Earn More Than Women.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the compensation differences between male and female academic urogynecologists at public institutions. METHODS: Urogynecologists at public universities with publicly available salary data as of June 2019 were eligible for the study. We collected characteristics, including sex, additional advanced degrees, years of training, board certification, leadership roles, number of authored scientific publications, and total National Institutes of Health funding projects and number of registered clinical trials for which the physician was a principal or co-investigator. We also collected total number of Medicare beneficiaries treated and total Medicare reimbursement as reported by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We used linear regression to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: We identified 85 academic urogynecologists at 29 public state academic institutions with available salary data eligible for inclusion in the study. Males were more likely to be an associate or a full professor (81%) compared with females (55%) and were more likely to serve as department chair, vice chair, or division director (59%) compared with females (30%). The mean annual salary was significantly higher among males ($323,227 ± $97,338) than females ($268,990 ± $72,311, P = 0.004). After adjusting for academic rank and leadership roles and years since residency, the discrepancy persisted, with females compensated on average $37,955 less annually. CONCLUSIONS: Salaries are higher for male urogynecologists than female urogynecologists, even when accounting for variables such as academic rank and leadership roles. Physician compensation is complex; the differences observed may be due to variables that are not captured in this study. Nevertheless, the magnitude of disparity found in our study warrants further critical assessment of potential biases within the field.

Occupational gender segregation and economic growth in U.S. local labor markets, 1980 through 2010.

The exchange of diverse ideas has been shown to be a major driver of economic growth and innovation in local labor markets across the U.S. Yet, persistently high levels of occupational gender segregation pose a barrier to such exchange between women and men workers. Consistent with this, organizational sociologists have identified multiple economic benefits to gender diversity in workplaces. Yet, it is unclear whether these trends apply to local labor markets, which constitute the ecological geographic environment for firms. In this study, I use fixed effects regression models to examine the relationship between labor market levels of segregation and economic growth from 1980 through 2010. I find that gender segregation hinders the expansion of finance and technology sectors as two industries that rely on the exchange of information and innovation. Consequently, higher levels of gender segregation are also a bane to economic productivity, as measured through hourly wages. Results from this study suggest that gender equity, manifested in lower levels of occupational segregation, is a vital ingredient in the economic development of local U.S. labor markets.

The gender differences in highly paid wage: a case study of Peruvian physicians.

In recent decades, the number of women pursuing careers in health has significantly increased. However, the physician labor market is still characterized by gender differences regarding payment. Using a nationally representative Peruvian sample of health providers (3,219 male and 1,063 female physicians), we estimated the gender gap in the likelihood of earning high wages for physicians and decomposed this gap in a proportion related to differences in individual characteristics (e.g. specialty, labor experience), and a residual proportion related to differences in returns to these characteristics. Our main results reveal that male physicians have on average an 81% higher likelihood of earning high salaries (monthly earning level > 5,000 PEN) relative to their female counterparts. Further, the main proportion of this gap is associated to the unexplained component (among 57% and 77%, according to the model specification), which may be associated to unobservable characteristics and discrimination in the Peruvian labor market.

What explains wage differences between male and female Brazilian physicians? A cross-sectional nationwide study.

OBJECTIVE: In many countries an increase in the number of women in medicine is accompanied by gender inequality in various aspects of professional practice. Women in medical workforce usually earn less than their male counterparts. The aim of this study was to describe the gender wage difference and analyse the associated factors in relation to Brazil's physicians. PARTICIPANTS: 2400 physicians. SETTING: Nationwide, cross-sectional study conducted in 2014. METHODS: Data were collected via a telephone enquiry. Sociodemographic and work characteristics were considered factors, and monthly wages (only the monthly earnings based on a medical profession) were considered as the primary outcome. A hierarchical multiple regression model was used to study the factors related to wage differences between male and female physicians. The adjustment of different models was verified by indicators of residual deviance and the Akaike information criterion. Analysis of variance was used to verify the equality hypothesis subsequently among the different models. RESULTS: The probability of men receiving the highest monthly wage range is higher than women for all factors. Almost 80% of women are concentrated in the three lowest wage categories, while 51% of men are in the three highest categories. Among physicians working between 20 and 40 hours a week, only 2.7% of women reported receiving >US$10 762 per month, compared with 13% of men. After adjustment for work characteristics in the hierarchical multiple regression model, the gender variable estimations (ß) remained, with no significant modifications. The final effect of this full model suggests that the probability of men receiving the highest salary level (≥US$10 762) is 17.1%, and for women it is 4.1%. Results indicate that a significant gender wage difference exists in Brazil. CONCLUSION: The inequality between sexes persisted even after adjusting for working factors such as weekly workload, number of weekly on-call shifts, physician office work, length of practice and specialisation.