Cross-Sectional Gender Analysis of US Radiation Oncology Residency Programs in 2019: More Than a Pipeline Issue?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the current status of gender disparities in academic radiation oncology departments in the United States and the associated factors. Methods and Materials The data were collected from publicly available resources, including websites of individual radiation oncology programs, the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and the Association of American Medical Colleges. We collected data on the gender information of residents in each year (postgraduate years 2-5) and of the faculty (attendings, program director, and chair) during the academic year 2018 to 2019. Spearman’s rho test, Pearson’s chi-squared test, and Fisher exact tests were used for evaluating the correlation among variables using SPSS version 24. Results Women constituted 30.8% of radiation oncology residents in the United States in 2019. Eight programs (12.5%) did not have any female residents in their programs, whereas 6 programs (9%) had women constituting more than half of their resident class. The fraction of female medical students applying to radiation oncology over the last 7 years varied between 27% and 33%. Female attending physicians accounted for 30.5% of all the attending physicians in the academic programs. In the leadership positions of the department, the gender gap was wider where only 19 (20%) and 11 (12%) of programs had female program director or chair, respectively. There was a positive correlation between the number of attending physicians and the number of female residents in programs ( P = .01). Conclusions A significant gender disparity continues to exist among the residents and physicians in the academic radiation oncology departments in the US. This disparity is pronounced in the leadership positions. The results of this study could be used as a benchmark to evaluate the progress that has been made by the efforts to improve gender disparities in radiation oncology.

Gender diversity and leadership in Radiation Oncology in Australia and New Zealand

“…In the past 60 years, there have only been 4 female presidents of the ASTRO 12 . Within U.S. RO academic programs, only 20% had a female program director and only 12% had a female chair 14 . Of the 725 invited speakers for the ASTRO annual meeting between 2012 and 2016, only 27% of these were women 15 .…”

“…12 Within U.S. RO academic programs, only 20% had a female program director and only 12% had a female chair. 14 Of the 725 invited speakers for the ASTRO annual meeting between 2012 and 2016, only 27% of these were women. 15 More broadly, across U.S. medical oncology, RO and surgical oncology academic programs, women composed of only 21.7%, 11.7% and 3.8% of chair positions, respectively.…”

SUPPORT: SUrvey of Parental Leave POlicies of RadiaTion Oncology Programs and Residency Applicants

“…The use of faculty and resident gender ratio by prospective applicants in rank list determination agrees with previous data demonstrating a high baseline number of female physicians within a specialty to be predictive of gender diversity among medical specialties 5 and with data demonstrating positive correlation between the numbers of female faculty and residents at a program. 12 Further, most respondents (53%) agreed they were likely to either seek fertility services or fertility service information at their prospective programs. Our findings demonstrate prospective radiation oncology applicants consider gender representation at potential programs and value family planning information in making their residency program decisions.…”

Gender Equity in Radiation Oncology: Culture Change Is a Marathon, Not a Sprint

“… 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 The lack of gender diversity in radiation oncology has been demonstrated at all stages of career, from medical schools to department chairs. 4 , 8 Multiple articles, 9 , 10 , 11 including an editorial from Foster et al, 11 demonstrated literature-based benefits of inclusion of a diverse group of female colleagues. Enhancing diversity and inclusion is paramount to providing culturally competent care to our patients and for field growth through recruitment of new trainees and retention of talented underrepresented minorities and women.…”