Professor Level Research Articles

Hispanic Faculty Trends in U.S. Medical Schools: A 50-Year Perspective

The U.S. Hispanic population has grown substantially over the past 50 years, and simultaneously, the number of U.S. medical schools and medical school faculty has increased. This study examines the trends for Hispanic faculty in clinical and basic science departments at U.S. medical schools. Method This retrospective, cross-sectional observational study analyzed data from the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster for faculty at all LCME-accredited medical schools from 1973 to 2022. Proportions of faculty were compared according to department, sex, rank, and Hispanic status using a 2-independent-sample t-test and simple linear regressions. Results The percentage of Hispanic medical school faculty increased from 1.7% in 1973 to 5.4% in 2022, with similar rates of increase in basic science and clinical departments. In 2022, departments with the highest representation of Hispanic faculty included family medicine and obstetrics and gynecology. The departments with the lowest representation of Hispanic faculty were orthopedic surgery and otolaryngology. In 2022, only 1.5% and 3.1% of all full professors were Hispanic females and males, respectively. Conclusion There was a minimal increase in the percentage of Hispanic faculty in medical schools over the last 50 years, and the rank was disproportionally higher at the Assistant Professor level, particularly for females. The combination of a rapid increase in the U.S. Hispanic population and a slow increase in Hispanic faculty has resulted in Hispanic medical school faculty being more underrepresented in academic medicine in 2022 than in 1973.

Impact of a New Departmental Awards Program on Faculty Engagement and Promotion

Abstract Background Many academic institutions recognize contributions to individual departments by awarding faculty departmental awards for their achievement in service, teaching and scholarship. Before 2019, our department had teaching awards chosen by residents, but there were no awards given to the faculty by peers for academic accomplishments. The objective of this abstract is to present the impact of the newly implemented departmental awards on the promotion and academic advancement of our faculty. Design Based on the already established awards in other departments within the School of Medicine a committee of six faculty members proposed six annual awards: Educator Impact, Outstanding Service, Outstanding Citizenship, Mentoring, and Basic and Clinical Science Publications. The committee defined activities and eligibility for each award category (for example, faculty could not receive the same award within 3 years). The categories and eligibility criteria are distributed to all faculty (around 120) each year. The first call for nominations occurred in 2019. Assessment of the awards program included the number of nominators and nominees each year and the impact on recipients’ academic advancement and recognition. Results In 2019, 17 faculty nominated 16 other faculty for the six awards. These numbers grew steadily, and by 2023, 42 faculty nominated 28 other faculty for the awards. The awards have been included in the curriculum vitae of five faculty who have been promoted to either the Associate Professor or Professor level and six faculty inducted into our institution’s Clinical Distinctions program. During the five years this awards program has existed, two faculty received two awards in different categories, whereas the remaining 26 awardees each received one award. Anecdotes from faculty during this time have been overwhelmingly positive. Conclusion Based on the increased engagement of faculty nominating their peers and the overall impact of the awards on faculty promotion and clinical distinction recognition, the new departmental awards program has been very successful.

Sex Diversity and Equity Among Fellows of the American Orthopaedic Association.

We hypothesized that women are underrepresented among fellows of the American Orthopaedic Association (AOA) relative to their prevalence among faculty at departments of orthopaedic surgery. Clinical faculty at departments of orthopaedic surgery that are affiliated with residency training programs were analyzed for AOA membership. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated for men and women with AOA membership relative to their prevalence among orthopaedic surgeon faculty. A PPR of <0.8 or >1.2 indicated under- or overrepresentation, respectively. PPR values between 0.8 and 1.2 indicated equivalent representation. Sex disparities in AOA membership were explored by academic rank and orthopaedic subspecialty. There were 4,310 orthopaedic surgery faculty, and 998 (23.2%) had AOA membership. Overall, women formed the minority of members in the AOA study cohort (11.4%), but they had equivalent representation relative to their prevalence among faculty (10.0%, PPR = 1.14, p = 0.210). In the AOA study cohort, women were the minority at each academic rank, including assistant professor (20.2% versus 79.8%, p < 0.001), associate professor (16.8% versus 83.2%, p < 0.001), and full professor (7.0% versus 93.0%, p < 0.001). However, women had greater representation in the AOA study cohort at each academic rank than would be expected based on their prevalence among faculty, including the assistant (PPR = 1.45), associate (PPR = 1.56), and full (PPR = 1.27) professor levels. Similarly, in the AOA study cohort, women were the minority in each orthopaedic subspecialty, but were only underrepresented in pediatric orthopaedics (PPR = 0.74). Women had greater representation in the AOA study cohort than would be expected by their prevalence among faculty in hand surgery (PPR = 1.51) and orthopaedic sports medicine (PPR = 1.33). In contrast, men had equivalent representation in each orthopaedic subspecialty. Women form a minority group in the AOA, but they exhibit greater representation in the AOA than would be expected based on their prevalence among faculty at each academic rank, and they have greater representation than men, who exhibit equivalent representation across all academic ranks. Collectively, these results disproved our hypothesis, and suggest that women are participating in the AOA at rates that are greater than their prevalence among faculty. Equitable participation of women in orthopaedic surgery is necessary to promote diversity and inclusion in the specialty. The AOA may be an important catalyst for future positive diversity and inclusion efforts within orthopaedic surgery.

Gender disparities in promotions and exiting in UK Russell Group universities

ABSTRACT A theoretical model of promotion and exits is presented incorporating statistical discrimination and bias, with both leading to a lower likelihood of promotion and a higher probability of exiting academia earlier for women. Using UK panel data, we confirm the model’s predictions that women academics are considerably under-represented in higher academic grades, and especially that gender gaps are largest at Full Professor level (e.g. we show that, cet. par. women took some 8.5 years more than men to achieve Associate Professor and then a further 6.1 years more to secure a Full Professorship). The policy implications of the results suggest that UK universities should emphasize the importance of organizational culture, evaluation practices and institutional procedures when hiring and promoting both men and women.

Academic standards and gender equality

This paper provides an analysis of gender equality at the Faculty of Arts of the University of Ljubljana and examines the main results in the broader context of quality in higher education. The Faculty of Arts participated in a project that aimed to develop a gender equality plan for the institution. Data from different aspects of institutional life were collected and analysed to gain a better insight into institutional equality and its relationship with the existing notion of quality in academia, especially through academic career advancement. The study reveals that more women than men tend to remain at the same academic rank for an extended period, particularly at the assistant professor level, and that they meet more objective and subjective obstacles on their academic path. Although there is an increasing awareness of academic policies and practices that foster equality in higher education, there is still a prevalent and strong perception that equality measures compromise academic standards.

Trends Among Women in Academic Medicine Faculty Ranks.

Introduction: Similar proportions of women and men have entered medical school since 2003. However, career advancement and promotion for women continues to be fraught with disparities and inequalities. Building on current literature, this study explores the rates of change of female faculty in faculty ranks over the last 10 years to gain a more comprehensive view of the faculty trends of women in academic medicine. Methods: Using the Faculty Administrative Management Online User System database, counts by gender and faculty rank at each Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) academic medical school were obtained. Statistical analysis was done using generalized estimating equations modeling to assess rates of change for each gender from 2012 to 2021. Results: Higher proportions of female faculty are concentrated at the Instructor and Assistant Professor level and lower proportions at the Associate Professor and Professor rank compared to male faculty. Over the study period, female faculty showed increased rate change compared to male faculty of 1.007 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.002-1.012) for Associate Professor rank and 1.012 (95% CI: 1.007-1.016) for Professor rank. At the Instructor and Assistant Professor levels, female faculty decreased at a relative rate of 0.980 (95% CI: 0.969-0.990) and 0.995 (95% CI: 0.992-0.997) each year, respectively. Conclusion: Female faculty continue to be concentrated at the junior faculty rank. Rate changes at the senior faculty rank for female faculty have slightly improved over the last 10 years compared to male faculty. However, this improvement is minimal, and work is still needed to achieve true gender equity in academic medicine.

Ophthalmology Faculty Diversity Trends in the US

Enhancing the diversity of ophthalmologists can potentially contribute to diminishing disparities in eye care. To investigate longitudinal trends in the representation of individuals underrepresented in medicine (URiM) and women among ophthalmology faculty compared with other specialties and to assess disparities between ophthalmology faculty demographic characteristics and the US population. In this cross-sectional study, a comprehensive analysis of Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster data between 2000 and 2021 was conducted, using data from the US Medical School Faculty report on 56 438 ophthalmology faculty members. The data set was used to differentiate ophthalmology faculty members by gender, rank, and designation as a URiM individual. Outcome measures included changes in URiM and non-URiM faculty proportions, faculty rank, gender, department chair positions, and the US population between 2000 and 2021. A total of 56 438 ophthalmology faculty members (37 511 men [66.5%]) were included in the study. The number of ophthalmology faculty increased from 1820 in 2000 to 3151 in 2021. Across all years, URiM female faculty represented 3.1% of ophthalmologists (1733 of 56 438), while URiM men accounted for 3.5% (1983 of 56 438). Overall, non-URiM men constituted 63.0% of ophthalmologists (35 528 of 56 438), and non-URiM women accounted for 30.5% (17 194 of 56 438). The proportion of URiM male faculty remained stable from 2000 to 2021 (63 of 1820 [3.5%] vs 104 of 3151 [3.3%]), with a small increase in URiM women faculty at junior faculty positions (2000, 40 of 1820 [2.2%]; 2021, 129 of 3151 [4.1%]; difference, 1.9% [95% CI, 0.9%-2.9%]). Proportions of non-URiM men decreased from 71.2% (1295 of 1820) in 2000 to 55.3% (1743 of 3151) in 2021 (difference, 15.8% [95% CI, 13.1%-18.6%]) and proportions of non-URiM women increased from 23.2% (422 of 1820) in 2000 to 37.3% (1175 of 3151) in 2021 (difference, 14.1% [95% CI, 11.5%-16.7%]). In terms of faculty rank, there were increases in representation of women from 2000 to 2021 at assistant professor (from 11.2% [203 of 1819] to 19.7% [622 of 3165]; difference, 8.5% [95% CI, 6.5%-10.5%]), associate professor (from 4.6% [83 of 1819] to 8.6% [271 of 3165]; difference, 4.0% [95% CI, 2.6%-5.4%]), and professor levels (from 2.8% [51 of 1819] to 7.1% [223 of 3165]; difference, 4.3% [95% CI, 3.9%-6.1%]). URiM representation remained stable at most ranks. Compared with other specialties, ophthalmology had among the lowest percentage change in URiM faculty. The expansion of ophthalmology's URiM faculty representation was less than one-third that of the diverse US population. These findings highlight substantial growth in ophthalmology faculty and an increase in women's representation across several faculty ranks. However, URiM representation has remained largely unchanged, despite an increase at the associate professor level. This finding emphasizes the need for continued efforts to enhance diversity in academic ophthalmology.

Internal university labor market: problem, inevitability or expediency?

There are 2 strategic vectors of human resource management: an open or closed model. The reasons for the development or rooting of a closed model (the internal labor market) we explain by two groups of basic conditions (factors): the specifics of the external environment and the business model of the organization. Each of the conditions determines the need to attract workers with specific characteristics.The article is devoted to the study of the influence of these factors on the creation of internal labor markets in universities. The methodological framework of the study is based on human resource management and labor economics. The specificity of the business model of the university is due to the multifunctionality of its target efficiency, the complexity of the hierarchy, and the special characteristics of the goods. Also, the reasons for the emergence of closed models of human resource management are associated with bilateral and quasi-market relations in the higher education. Together, these factors explain the emergence of a special type of internal labor market. Its key characteristics are an indirect system for assessing the level of professor’s qualifications; self-selection and inbreeding as the unique institutions; implicit individual contracts as a by-product of the hidden career and the working time elasticity. In Russian universities, internal labor markets are a non-alternative model of human resource management due to the underdevelopment of infrastructure, as well as an imbalance in supply and demand in the external labor market. It is shown that the functioning of such a model will be relatively expedient when building the effective work of a university in a loose coupling net of national and international academic community.

Sex Disparities Among Fellowship Program Directors in Orthopaedic Surgery.

Women are underrepresented in the orthopaedic surgery workforce in the U.S. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the representation of women among fellowship program directors (PDs) in orthopaedic surgery. This was a retrospective cohort study of fellowship PDs in orthopaedic surgery during the 2022 to 2023 academic year. Academic, training, and demographic characteristics were collected from internet-based resources. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated for both men and women. A PPR of <0.8 indicated underrepresentation and a PPR of >1.2 indicated overrepresentation. Bivariate analyses were utilized to assess the correlation between sex diversity and geographic region and between sex diversity and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accreditation status. The relationship between the median annual salary and the sex diversity of each orthopaedic subspecialty was analyzed with use of the Pearson correlation coefficient. This study included 600 fellowship PDs, 40 (6.7%) of whom were women. In total, 24.5% of the fellowship PDs were assistant professors (8.8% women versus 91.2% men, p < 0.001); 26.2% were associate professors (9.6% women versus 90.4% men, p < 0.001); 36.8% were full professors (4.5% women versus 95.5% men, p < 0.001); and 12.5% were unranked (2.7% women versus 97.3% men, p < 0.001). The representation of women increased with academic rank, as reflected in their prevalence at the assistant (PPR = 0.67), associate (PPR = 0.77), and full professor (PPR = 0.80) levels. Among the orthopaedic subspecialties, musculoskeletal oncology (19.0%), pediatric orthopaedics (14.6%), and hand surgery (12.6%) had the highest proportions of women fellowship PDs. PPRs were lowest for orthopaedic sports medicine (PPR = 0.35), shoulder and elbow (PPR = 0.45), and adult reconstruction (PPR = 0.52). Women PDs had equitable representation in musculoskeletal oncology (PPR = 1.17), hand surgery (PPR = 1.02), foot and ankle (PPR = 0.84), and orthopaedic trauma (PPR = 0.80). Median subspecialty compensation was negatively correlated with the prevalence of women among fellowship PDs (r = -0.70, p = 0.036). Geographic region was not associated with sex diversity (p = 0.434), but programs with ACGME accreditation had significantly more women fellowship PDs than those without (11.0% versus 3.9%, p < 0.001). Women are underrepresented among orthopaedic fellowship PDs, especially in certain subspecialties (orthopaedic sports medicine, shoulder and elbow, and adult reconstruction). More research is needed to understand the barriers that impact the representation of women among leadership positions in orthopaedic surgery. Greater sex diversity among fellowship PDs may help to increase the recruitment of women into orthopaedic subspecialties. The equitable consideration of orthopaedic surgeons from all backgrounds for leadership positions can increase workforce diversity, which may improve the vitality of the orthopaedic community.

Women Are Underrepresented Among Principal Investigators of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Clinical Trials in the United States.

Leadership of clinical trials confers national recognition and promotes academic advancement. We hypothesized that women would be underrepresented among principal investigators (PIs) of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials in the United States. A query of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials from 2015 to 2021 was performed on ClinicalTrials.gov. Clinical trials were included if they involved a U.S.-based orthopaedic-surgeon PI. We analyzed the sex representation of arthroplasty PIs among junior-level (assistant professor) and senior-level (associate or full professor) faculty. Participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs) were calculated by comparing the sex representation among arthroplasty PIs with that among academic arthroplasty faculty at institutions conducting hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials. A PPR of <0.8 indicated underrepresentation and a PPR of >1.2 indicated overrepresentation. A total of 157 clinical trials involving 192 arthroplasty PIs were included. Of these PIs, only 2 (1.0%) were women. PIs were mostly funded by academic institutions (66%) and industry (33%). U.S. federal sources funded a minority (1%) of PIs. Of the 243 male arthroplasty faculty who were eligible, 190 men (78.2%) served as PIs. In contrast, of the 17 female arthroplasty faculty who were eligible, only 2 women (11.8%) served as PIs (p < 0.001). Across the entire cohort of arthroplasty PIs, women were underrepresented (PPR = 0.16), whereas men were equitably represented (PPR = 1.06). Women were underrepresented at the assistant professor (PPR = 0.0), associate professor (PPR = 0.52), and full professor (PPR = 0.58) levels. Women were underrepresented among PIs of hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials, which may lead to disparities in academic promotion and advancement. More research is needed to understand the potential barriers to female leadership of clinical trials. Greater awareness and engagement are needed to create sex equity in clinical trial leadership for hip and knee arthroplasty research. The underrepresentation of women among arthroplasty PIs may lead to fewer options in surgical providers for patients and may limit access to musculoskeletal care for certain patient populations. A diverse arthroplasty workforce can promote attention to issues that disproportionately affect historically underrepresented and vulnerable patient populations.

Relationship Between Gender and Academic and Military Achievement Among USU Medical School Graduates

ABSTRACT Introduction Despite increases in the number of female matriculants in medical school, civilian data demonstrate that women still struggle to reach parity in attainment of leadership positions. In military medicine, we have seen a major increase in the number of women graduating from the USU. Yet, we still know little about the representation of female military physicians in leadership positions. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between gender and academic and military achievement among USU School of Medicine graduates. Methods Utilizing the USU alumni survey sent to graduates from the classes of 1980 to 2017, items of interest, such as highest military rank, leadership positions held, academic rank, and time in service, were used to evaluate the relationship between gender and academic and military achievement. Contingency table statistical analysis was conducted to compare the gender distribution on the survey items of interest. Results Pairwise comparison demonstrated significant differences between gender in the O-4 (P = .003) and O-6 (P = .0002) groups, with females having a higher-than-expected number of O-4 officers and males having a higher-than-expected number of O-6 officers. These differences persisted in a subsample analysis that excluded those who separated from active duty prior to 20 years of service. There was a significant association between gender and holding the position of commanding officer (χ2(1) = 6.61, P &amp;lt; .05) with fewer females than expected. In addition, there was a significant association between gender and the highest academic rank achieved (χ2(3) = 9.48, P &amp;lt; 0.05) with lower-than-expected number of females reaching the level of full professor, in contrast to males who exceed the expected number. Conclusions This study suggests that female graduates of USU School of Medicine have not achieved promotion to the highest levels of rank, military, or academic leadership at the projected rate. Efforts to explore what barriers may impact military medicine’s desire to have more equal representation of women in higher ranks and positions should be undertaken with specific attention to what drives retention versus separation of medical officers and if systematic changes are needed to help promote equity for women in military medicine.

The Complicated Middle of the Academic Deanery

The complicated and ever-growing roles of assistant and associate deans (A-deans) can often be compared to those of middle managers. With responsibilities that are rapidly expanding and often unclear or overlapping with other personnel, A-deans may face identity crises. Additionally, because they are often not at the full professor level, they may experience difficulty achieving promotion. In this commentary, the authors call for increased awareness of the challenges associated with these roles and suggest opportunities for change. To maximize effectiveness in their roles, the Academy and colleges/schools are encouraged to explore workload/expectations for A-deans and associated reward structures, including promotion and tenure guidelines with explicit recognition for the important role(s) they play. A-deans are also encouraged to advocate for infrastructure and responsibilities that support both their academic institution and their own individual professional goals.

Promotion Committees and Attending Meetings Improve Promotion Rates for Early Career Faculty.

Academic promotion is an important goal in an academic physician's career trajectory. Understanding the factors that influence success in academic promotion is important in providing appropriate guidance and resources. The Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) conducted a large omnibus survey of family medicine department chairs. Participants were asked about recent promotion rates within their department, as well as about whether their department had a promotion committee, whether faculty regularly met with the chair regarding preparation for promotion, whether faculty had been assigned mentors, and whether faculty attended national academic meetings. The response rate was 54%. Most chairs were male (66.3%), White (77.9%), and aged 50 to 59 (41.3%) or 60 to 69 (42.3%) years. Attendance at professional meetings was associated with a higher rate of assistant-to-associate professor promotions. Departments with a committee to help faculty with promotions had higher rates of promotion for both assistant-to-associate and associate-to-full professor levels than departments without a committee. Promotion was not associated with assigned mentorship, support from the chair, departmental or institutional sponsorship of faculty development regarding promotion, or annual assessments of progress toward promotion. Attendance at professional meetings and the presence of a departmental promotions committee may be helpful factors in achieving academic promotion. An assigned mentor was not found to be a helpful factor.

A Survey of Parental Leave Academic Faculty Experiences Identifies an Overlooked Need (P7-7.005)

<h3>Objective:</h3> This study sought to understand academic neurology faculty experiences undertaking parental leave (PL). <h3>Background:</h3> PL and disproportionate childcare may play a role in the gender disparity in senior leadership in academic neurology. There are a dearth of publications analyzing the experiences of PL in academic medicine. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> An online, anonymous 34 question survey was developed to evaluate neurology faculty experiences with PL. Questions pertained to demographics, faculty rank, support for PL, coverage, lactation resources, and post-PL depression/anxiety. <h3>Results:</h3> 40 of 81 (49%) neurology faculty completed the survey. 60% of respondents were age 35–44 years. 49.5% identified as assistant professor or instructor level. 61% had taken PL. 60% had provided coverage for a colleague on PL, with 60% rating the coverage as “fair”. For support, colleagues were considered the primary resource to assist in preparation of PL, followed by FMLA/department coordinators and then supervisors. 47.83% of respondents took 8–12 weeks. 30% of respondents took less than 4 weeks. Primary reasons to return from PL included obligation to patients, financial constraints, call responsibility and ran out of paid time leave. Peer pressure and employer pressure were cited by only 10% of respondents. 40% felt that PL would hinder advancement in the department. Although depression “baby blues” and anxiety were self-identified symptoms post-PL, very few faculty sought professional help. Overall, support for PL during and planning leave were rated highly for department and colleagues. However, support for lactation accommodations was identified as an opportunity for improvement. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> Faculty respondents in our survey rated support planning and during PL favorably. However, opportunities for improvement occurred during return to work including lactation accommodations/resources, self-identified depression and anxiety and feelings that advancement in the department would be hindered by PL. Lack of support during return to work following PL could lead to burnout and attrition in young academic neurologists. <b>Disclosure:</b> Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Argenx. Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for ArgenX. Dr. Nguyen has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care. Dr. Williams has received research support from UTHealth at Houston. The institution of Dr. Sharrief has received research support from NIH. The institution of Dr. Sharrief has received research support from University of Houston . Dr. Sharrief has a non-compensated relationship as a Consultant with Abbot that is relevant to AAN interests or activities.

Gender Equity in Academic Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Departments: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Gender equity in obstetrics and gynecology remains a barrier to career mobility and workplace satisfaction. This study aimed to evaluate gender equity for academic positions in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) divisions with an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship in the United States. This was a cross-sectional observational study of all FPMRS divisions with an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship program in the United States in July 2020 using publicly available demographic and academic data collected from online search engines. Gender equity in academic FPMRS was assessed by gender representation, academic appointment, and research productivity of each attending physician within the division. Research productivity was assessed using both the H-index with career length controlled for with the M-quotient. There were 348 attending physicians from 72 FPMRS divisions (198 female [56.9%], 150 male [43.1%]). A large percentage of female attending physicians were at the assistant professor level (75.8% [94 of 124]) when compared with their male counterparts (24.4% [30 of 124]; P < 0.001). Conversely, there were a larger percentage of male attending physicians (62.2% [56 of 90]) at the professor level when compared with their female counterparts (37.8% [34 of 90]; P < 0.001). There was no difference in research productivity between male and female attending physicians after controlling for career length with the M-quotient (P = 0.65). Only age (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.24) and the M-quotient (odds ratio, 36.17, 95% confidence interval, 8.57-152.73) were significantly associated with professorship. Our study found that there are more female attending physicians in FPMRS and that most are assistant professors. Male and female FPMRS attending physicians had similar research productivity with respect to their career lengths. Gender was not a determinant for achieving a "professor" appointment.

Women in Transplant Surgery in Italy.

Women in Transplant Surgery in Italy.

Calling on Sponsorship: Analysis of Speaker Gender Representation at Hand Society Meetings.

The paucity of leadership diversity in surgical specialties is well documented. Unequal opportunities for participation at scientific meetings may impact future promotions within academic infrastructures. This study evaluated gender representation of surgeon speakers at hand surgery meetings. Data were retrieved from the 2010 and 2020 meetings of the American Association for Hand Surgery (AAHS) and American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH). Programs were evaluated for invited and peer-reviewed speakers excluding keynote speakers and poster presentations. Gender was determined from publicly available sources. Bibliometric data (Hirsch index) for invited speakers were analyzed. In 2010 at the AAHS ( n = 142) and ASSH meetings ( n = 180), female surgeons represented 4% of the invited speakers and in 2020 increased to 15% at AAHS ( n = 193) and 19% at ASSH ( n = 439). From 2010 to 2020, female surgeon invited speakers had a 3.75-fold increase at AAHS and 4.75-fold increase at ASSH. Representation of female surgeon peer-reviewed presenters at these meetings was similar (2010 AAHS, 26%; and 2010 ASSH, 22%; 2020 AAHS, 23%; 2020 ASSH, 22%). The academic rank of women speakers was significantly lower ( P < 0.001) than for male speakers. At the assistant professor level, the mean Hirsch index was significantly lower ( P < 0.05) for female invited speakers. Although there was a significant improvement in gender diversity in invited speakers at the 2020 meetings compared with 2010, female surgeons remain underrepresented. Gender diversity is lacking at national hand surgery meetings, and continued effort and sponsorship of speaker diversity is imperative to curate an inclusive hand society experience.

Comment on “Japan's Higher Education Policies under Global Challenge”

Comment on “Japan's Higher Education Policies under Global Challenge”

2363. Clinician Educators within Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA): Who We Are, What We Do, and What We Need to Succeed

Abstract Background To best support, its membership, the IDSA Medical Education Community of Practice (Med Ed CoP) must know the spectrum of educational duties, common challenges, and needs among its clinician educators (CE). Further, benchmark data for medical education is lacking, including average time to perform duties, salary support, and other resources. Therefore, we conducted a survey to help identify opportunities for institutions and IDSA to support Infectious Disease (ID) CE. Methods We conducted an anonymous electronic mixed-methods survey of ID CE faculty in the United States. The survey link was distributed through the IDSA Med Ed CoP and Program Director discussion forums and receptions at IDWeek 2021. Results Approximately 90/552 (16%) participants completed a majority of the survey. Respondents were evenly distributed by gender and geographic region. A majority of respondents were Caucasian, aged 30 – 49 years, and at the Assistant or Associate Professor level (Table 1). Overall breakdown of allocated duties is as follows; median education full-time equivalent (FTE) was 0.25, clinical FTE=0.50, administrative FTE=0.16, and research FTE=0 (Table 1). Faculty most commonly taught medical students (95%), physician residents (92%), and fellows (88%) and held positions within ID fellowship programs (69%) and medical schools (50%, Table 2). CE's common challenges included competing responsibilities (69%), lack of medical education mentorship (51%), and inexperience in medical education publication (67%). In addition, 77% reported burnout in the past year, frequently due to an increased pandemic-related workload. CEs would like to see opportunities for IDSA grants, advocacy for salary support, and increased opportunities to publish within IDSA journals. CEs report finding reward in their educational work related to: teaching the next generation, developing relationships with learners and colleagues, and promoting others’ success. Conclusion In our study, ID CEs identified common challenges including educational work often requiring more time than allocated FTE, lack of mentors, publishing educational activities, recognition of CE work for promotion, and burnout. Additionally, ID CEs identified practical strategies in which their institutions and IDSA can offer support. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

November 2022 Placement Ads

November 2022 Placement Ads