Representation of Women Among Invited Speakers at Medical Specialty Conferences.

Background: Gender-related differences have been found among invited speakers in select professional and medical societies. We examined whether similar disparities existed among keynote speakers, plenary speakers, and invited lecturers in a broad range of medical specialty conferences from 2013 to 2017. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on 27 U.S. medical specialty conferences for which data were available on plenary speakers, keynote speakers, and/or invited lecturers. For each speaker, gender and degree(s) were determined. Fisher's exact test was performed to compare proportions of women among speakers to Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC) physician workforce data on gender distribution. Results: In aggregate, we identified 246 women among 984 speakers, significantly lower than expected when compared with 2015 AAMC data (25.0% vs. 34.0%; p < 0.00001). Compared with AAMC data reported in 2013, 2015, and 2017, women were significantly underrepresented in 2013 (p = 0.0064) and 2015 (p = 0.00004). In 2017, the proportion of women among invited speakers trended lower than AAMC active women physicians but did not reach significance (p = 0.309). Analysis of individual conference data stratified by year indicated that, while the representation of women among all speakers improved between 2015 and 2017, the representation of women among keynote speakers, plenary speakers, and invited lectureships was variable (including zero levels some years during the study period) and remained lower than expected as compared with workforce data for specific medical specialties. Conclusions: Evaluating for and improving disparities is recommended to ensure gender equity among invited speakers across all medical specialty conferences.

Representation of women plenary speakers at the American Academy of Neurology Annual Meeting.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether women have been equitably represented among plenary speakers at the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Annual Meeting by counting and categorizing speakers and comparing outcomes to AAN membership and US neurology workforce data. METHODS: Lists of plenary speakers between 1958 and 2019 (62 years) were obtained from the AAN. The primary outcome measures were numbers and proportions of men and women in aggregate and among physicians. RESULTS: We identified 635 plenary speakers, including 148 (23.3%) women. Specifically, women made up 14.6% (19 of 130) of presidential and 25.5% (129 of 505) of nonpresidential plenary session speakers. The inclusion of women plenary speakers was meaningfully higher (h = 0.33; difference 14.9%; 95% confidence interval 4.2%-26.7%) for nonphysicians (27 of 74 [36.5%]) than physicians (121 of 561 [21.6%]). Although at zero levels for Annual Meetings held between 1958 and 1990 and at mostly low but varying levels thereafter, the representation of women and women physicians has been at or above their proportions in the AAN membership and US neurology workforce since 2017. Comparison of representation by plenary session name revealed an unequal distribution of women, with women physicians concentrated in the Sidney Carter Award in Child Neurology presidential session. CONCLUSION: Historically and recently, women and women physicians were underrepresented among AAN plenary speakers. As the AAN has taken active steps to address equity, women have been included in more representative proportions overall. However, notable gaps remain, especially in specific prestigious plenary sessions, and further research is needed to determine causality.

Use of a Coordinated Social Media Strategy to Improve Dissemination of Research and Collect Solutions Related to Workforce Gender Equity.

Background: To increase awareness, search for solutions, and drive change, disparity-related research needs to be strategically disseminated. This study aimed to quantify whether a social media strategy could: (1) amplify dissemination of gender equity-related articles and (2) collect proposed solutions to gender equity issues. Methods: In April 2018, eight published journal articles covering separate gender equity issues were presented in a 1-hour Twitter chat hosted by Physician's Weekly. Metrics data were collected before, during, and after the chat. During the chat, one question related to each article was tweeted at a time. Qualitative data were extracted from responses and evaluated for thematic content. Results: In the 16-hour period during and following the chat, we tallied 1500 tweets from 294 participants and 8.6 million impressions (potential views). The Altmetric Attention Score of each article increased (average, 126.5 points; range, 91-208 points). Within the respective journal, the Altmetric Rank of seven articles improved (range, 3 to ≥19), while the eighth maintained its #1 rank. The one article for which share and download data were available experienced a 729% increase in shares following prechat posts and another 113% bump after the chat, a 1667% increase overall (n = 45-795). Similarly, downloads, and presumably reads, increased 712% following prechat posts and another 47% bump after the chat, a 1093% increase overall (n = 394-4700). We tallied 181 potential solutions to the eight gender equity-related questions. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that social media can be used strategically to increase the dissemination of research articles and collect solution-focused feedback.

Physician Workforce Disparities and Patient Care: A Narrative Review.

Background: Ensuring the strength of the physician workforce is essential to optimizing patient care. Challenges that undermine the profession include inequities in advancement, high levels of burnout, reduced career duration, and elevated risk for mental health problems, including suicide. This narrative review explores whether physicians within four subpopulations represented in the workforce at levels lower than predicted from their numbers in the general population-women, racial and ethnic minorities in medicine, sexual and gender minorities, and people with disabilities-are at elevated risk for these problems, and if present, how these problems might be addressed to support patient care. In essence, the underlying question this narrative review explores is as follows: Do physician workforce disparities affect patient care? While numerous articles and high-profile reports have examined the relationship between workforce diversity and patient care, to our knowledge, this is the first review to examine the important relationship between diversity-related workforce disparities and patient care. Methods: Five databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, and EBSCO Discovery Service) were searched by a librarian. Additional resources were included by authors, as deemed relevant to the investigation. Results: The initial database searches identified 440 potentially relevant articles. Articles were categorized according to subtopics, including (1) underrepresented physicians and support for vulnerable patient populations; (2) factors that could exacerbate the projected physician deficit; (3) methods of addressing disparities among underrepresented physicians to support patient care; or (4) excluded (n=155). The authors identified another 220 potentially relevant articles. Of 505 potentially relevant articles, 199 (39.4%) were included in this review. Conclusions: This report demonstrates an important gap in the literature regarding the impact of physician workforce disparities and their effect on patient care. This is a critical public health issue and should be urgently addressed in future research and considered in clinical practice and policy decision-making.

Women in Pediatrics: Progress, Barriers, and Opportunities for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

Gender bias and discrimination have profound and far-reaching effects on the health care workforce, delivery of patient care, and advancement of science and are antithetical to the principles of professionalism. In the quest for gender equity, medicine, with its abundance of highly educated and qualified women, should be leading the way. The sheer number of women who comprise the majority of pediatricians in the United States suggests this specialty has a unique opportunity to stand out as progressively equitable. Indeed, there has been much progress to celebrate for women in medicine and pediatrics. However, many challenges remain, and there are areas in which progress is too slow, stalled, or even regressing. The fair treatment of women pediatricians will require enhanced and simultaneous commitment from leaders in 4 key gatekeeper groups: academic medical centers, hospitals, health care organizations, and practices; medical societies; journals; and funding agencies. In this report, we describe the 6-step equity, diversity, and inclusion cycle, which provides a strategic methodology to (1) examine equity, diversity, and inclusion data; (2) share results with stakeholders; (3) investigate causality; (4) implement strategic interventions; (5) track outcomes and adjust strategies; and (6) disseminate results. Next steps include the enforcement of a climate of transparency and accountability, with leaders prioritizing and financially supporting workforce gender equity. This scientific and data-driven approach will accelerate progress and help pave a pathway to better health care and science.

Assessment of Women Physicians Among Authors of Perspective-Type Articles Published in High-Impact Pediatric Journals.

Importance: Most pediatricians are women; however, women pediatricians are underrepresented in academic leadership positions such as department chairs and journal editors and among first authors of original research articles published in pediatric journals. Publication of all types of articles, particularly in high-impact specialty journals, is crucial to career building and academic success. Objective: To examine the gender-related profile associated with authors of perspective-type articles in the 4 highest-impact general pediatric journals to determine whether women physicians were similarly underrepresented. Design and Setting: Cross-sectional study of perspective-type articles published between 2013 and 2017 in the 4 highest-impact general pediatric journals: Academic Pediatrics, JAMA Pediatrics, The Journal of Pediatrics, and Pediatrics. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was the number and percentage of first-author women physicians as compared with men physicians. Secondary outcome measures included number and percentage of all men and all women among last authors and coauthors associated with physician first authors. Results: A total of 425 perspective-type articles were identified, with physicians listed as the first author on 338 (79.5%). Women were underrepresented among physician first authors of known gender (140 of 336 [41.7%]), particularly among physician first authors of article categories described as scholarly (range, 15.4%-44.1%) vs categories described as narrative (range, 52.9%-65.6%) in nature. Women were also underrepresented among last authors and coauthors of articles attributed to both men and women physician first authors, although the underrepresentation of women among last authors and coauthors was more pronounced if a man physician was the first author. Conclusions and Relevance: Because perspective-type articles provide an opportunity for authors to express their opinions, provide insights that may influence their field, and enhance their academic resumes, there is a need for pediatric journal editors and leaders of medical societies who are associated with these journals to ensure the equitable inclusion of women in medicine. A hallmark of best practices for diversity and inclusion in academic medicine is transparency with regard to reporting of gender disparities in all areas of scholarship attribution and credit.

Women physicians underrepresented in American Academy of Neurology recognition awards.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate representation by gender among recipients of physician recognition awards presented by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN). METHODS: We analyzed lists of individual recipients over the 63-year history of the AAN recognition awards. Included were awards intended primarily for physician recipients that recognized a body of work over the course of a career. The primary outcome measures were total numbers and proportions of men and women physician award recipients. RESULTS: During the period studied, the proportion of women increased from 18% (1996) to 31.5% (2016) among AAN US neurologist members and from 18.6% (1992) to 35% (2015) in academia, and the AAN presented 323 awards to physician recipients. Of these recipients, 264 (81.7%) were men and 59 (18.3%) were women. During the most recent 10-year period studied (2008-2017), the proportion of women increased from 24.7% (2008) to 31.5% (2016) among AAN US neurologist members and from 28% (2009) to 35% (2015) in academia, and the AAN presented 187 awards to physician recipients, comprising 146 men (78.1%) and 41 women (21.9%). Although it has been more than 2 decades since the proportion of women among US neurologist members of the AAN was lower than 18%, 1 in 4 AAN award categories demonstrated 0% to 18% representation of women among physician recipients during the most recent decade. Moreover, for highly prestigious awards, underrepresentation was more pronounced. CONCLUSION: Although the reasons why are not clear, women were often underrepresented among individual physician recognition award recipient lists, particularly for highly prestigious awards.

Where Are the Women? The Underrepresentation of Women Physicians Among Recognition Award Recipients From Medical Specialty Societies.

Membership in medical societies is associated with a number of benefits to members that may include professional education, opportunities to present research, scientific and/or leadership training, networking, and others. In this perspective article, the authors address the value that medical specialty society membership and inclusion have in the development of an academic physician's career and how underrepresentation of women may pose barriers to their career advancement. Because society membership itself is not likely sufficient to support the advancement of academic physicians, this report focuses on one key component of advancement that also can be used as a measure of inclusion in society activities-the representation of women physicians among recipients of recognition awards. Previous reports demonstrated underrepresentation of women physicians among recognition award recipients from 2 physical medicine and rehabilitation specialty organizations, including examples of zero or near-zero results. This report investigated whether zero or near-zero representation of women physicians among recognition award recipients from medical specialty societies extended beyond the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Examples of the underrepresentation of women physicians, as compared with their presence in the respective field, was found across a range of additional specialties, including dermatology, neurology, anesthesiology, orthopedic surgery, head and neck surgery, and plastic surgery. The authors propose a call for action across the entire spectrum of medical specialty societies to: (1) examine gender diversity and inclusion data through the lens of the organization's mission, values, and culture; (2) transparently report the results to members and other stakeholders including medical schools and academic medical centers; (3) investigate potential causes of less than proportionate representation of women; (4) implement strategies designed to improve inclusion; (5) track outcomes as a means to measure progress and inform future strategies; and (6) publish the results to engage community members in conversation about the equitable representation of women.