Analyzing the Current State and Visibility of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives at Urology Residency Programs.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze AUA urology residency program websites to determine visibility of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. There is growing interest in DEI initiatives by urology applicants, and in recent years, urology programs have invested in efforts to promote DEI. METHODS: All ACGME-accredited urology residency program with a website were assessed. Military programs were excluded. A DEI Score Card was developed using published pillars of DEI, including five domains: departmental inclusion, pipeline growth, departmental education, community engagement, and faculty demographics. Program Doximity rank, address, and surrounding demographics were collected to determine predictors of investing in DEI. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one urology residency websites were included for analysis. Only 40.7% of programs referenced DEI on their webpage, and 21.4% offered funded mentorship opportunities. Department education and community engagement were the least popular initiatives. The Western, Northeastern, and North Central sections had the highest DEI total score with wide variation across domains. Mention of DEI was not associated with program's county-level social vulnerability or percent minority but was associated with being a top 50 program (OR=4.0; 95% CI 1.8, 8.9; P = .0007). CONCLUSION: Less than half of academic urology programs' websites referenced DEI initiatives. Using a DEI score card, our study shows that investment in DEI varies widely by AUA section, and greater investment is positively correlated with program rank. Our DEI score card serves as a tool that programs can use to assess their current DEI investment, identify areas for improvement, and ensure existing initiatives are visible to applicants.

Trends in the Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US Urology Workforce.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the historical trends and factors underlying the current state of racial/ethnic representation within the urology workforce at each stage of the educational pipeline. METHODS: Using data from the US Census Bureau and the Association of American Medical Colleges, trends in racial/ethnic distribution for 2007-2008 to 2019-2020 were tracked in the educational pipeline for academic urologists. This pipeline was defined as progressively diminishing cohorts, starting with the US population, leading to medical school application, acceptance, and graduation, through to urology residency application, matching, and graduation, and ending with urology faculty appointment. A comparative cohort analysis was performed for academic year 2018-2019 for differences in racial/ethnic distribution across cohorts by binomial tests. RESULTS: From 2007-2008 to 2019-2020, while the proportion of Latinx/Hispanic urology applicants increased by 0.38% per year (95% CI 0.24, 0.52), their proportion in the urology resident population remained unchanged (0.07% per year, 95% CI -0.20, 0.06) from 2011-2012 to 2019-2020. There was a decrease in the proportion of Black urology applicants (-0.13% per year, 95% CI -0.24, -0.02) and no change in the resident population (-0.03% per year, 95% CI -0.11, 0.05), despite an increase in total number of residents (n = 1043 to n = 1734) from 2009-2010 to 2019-2020. In 2018-2019, there were step-wise decreases in proportion of Black and Latinx/Hispanic members represented at critical stages of the educational pipeline (P <0.0001). CONCLUSION: Attrition in URM urologists occur at key educational stages. This paper offers opportunities for the design of interventions to diversify the urology workforce.