Diversity, Inclusion, and Representation: It Is Time to Act

Lightfoote, Johnson B.; Deville, Curtiland; Loralie, D.; Winkfield, Karen M.; Macura, Katarzyna J.

doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2016.08.008

Cited by 68 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An important barrier is insufficient URM role models. 18 The lack of oncology faculty from backgrounds that are traditionally URM may affect specialty selection. Additionally, because evidence shows that oncologists' unconscious or implicit racial bias is negatively associated with oncologist communication and patients' reactions to racially discordant oncology interactions, 6 implicit bias may also influence the selection of oncology training program trainees, irrespective of qualifications.…”

Section: Barriers To Diversificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

American Society of Clinical Oncology Strategic Plan for Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Oncology Workforce

Winkfield

Flowers

Patel

et al. 2017

JCO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

veloped through a multistakeholder effort led by the ASCO Health Disparities Committee, the purpose of the plan is to guide the formal efforts of ASCO in this area over the next three years (2017 to 2020). There are three primary goals: (1) to establish a longitudinal pathway for increasing workforce diversity, (2) to enhance ASCO leadership diversity, and (3) to integrate a focus on diversity across ASCO programs and policies. Improving quality cancer care in the United States requires the recruitment of oncology professionals from diverse backgrounds. The ASCO Strategic Plan to Increase Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Oncology Workforce is designed to enhance existing programs and create new opportunities that will move us closer to the vision of achieving an oncology workforce that reflects the demographics of the US population it serves.

show abstract

Section: Barriers To Diversificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

American Society of Clinical Oncology Strategic Plan for Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Oncology Workforce

Winkfield

Flowers

Patel

et al. 2017

JCO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…vitally important to understand and improve, as diversity is believed to be a key element to improving equal access to health care in the United States [2,10,11,12].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Mentorship and Networking Group for Women in Radiology

Ladd

Bonaminio

Gonda

et al. 2017

Journal of the American College of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

THE PROBLEM: TOO FEW FEMALE ROLE MODELS IN RADIOLOGYWomen are underrepresented in radiology [1]. A 2014 study found that the percentages of female practicing radiologists (23.5%), academic radiology faculty (26.1%), radiology residents (27.8%), and radiology applicants (28.1%) were all substantially below the percentage of women graduating from medical school in the United States (48.3%) [2]. Additionally, of the twenty largest residency training programs in the US, radiology ranked ninth for overall size but only seventeenth for female representation [2].As the medical field has become increasingly diverse, radiology has failed to keep pace.Over the last four decades, the percentage of female radiologists in the United States has held steady in the low to mid-20s [2,3,4,5]. Many studies have been conducted in recent years to better understand the forces behind the apparent gendering of certain medical specialties, a term which reflects the overwhelming predominance of women in some specialties such as pediatrics and obstetrics-gynecology and men in others such as radiology and orthopedic surgery [6,7,8].Although these studies failed to reveal conclusive evidence as to the causes, they managed to uncover potential contributing factors, such as the presence of gender bias in certain specialties, cultural differences between the sexes, and the presence or lack of identifiable role models in different fields [6,7,8,9]. The forces that produce gender disparity in medical specialties are

show abstract

“…Radiology is just one example of the persistent gender gap that plagues many medical specialties, with women representing fewer than 30% of total practicing radiologists and trainees in the United States [6,7,8]. Radiology educators have long debated the most effective means by which to improve the recruitment of women to our field, but they have managed to identify only potential contributing factors [9,10]. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Common misconceptions include: too little impact on patient care, a dark and isolated working environment located far from patient care areas, and too competitive a match process to get a residency position [5,7,11]. Unfortunately, because radiology is absent from the core curricula of most medical schools in the United States, these false stereotypes remain unchecked in the minds of most students when they make their specialty decisions [7,9,10].In addition to the long-held misconceptions about radiology, the poor exposure that medical students get to the field is itself a serious obstacle to the recruitment of women [5,10]. Radiology must compete for student interest against specialties that have the luxury of one or more required rotations within the medical school curriculum.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Students aren't afforded the opportunity to see the value that radiologists bring to patient care or to even imagine themselves in a radiology career. Instead, the misconceptions go unabated and eventually help to exclude radiology as a potential career choice in the minds of most students.A third obstacle to recruiting women to radiology is the persistent shortage of women to serve as visual role models for students [9,10,12,13,14]. The importance of female role models in shaping the career decisions of women has been established in many medical fields including radiology, surgery, and internal medicine [15,16,17].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Illusion of Choice: Gender Segregation and the Challenge of Recruiting Women to Radiology

Heitkamp

Norris

Rissing

2017

Journal of the American College of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, the feminization of medicine has promised equal educational and professional opportunities for women pursuing medical careers [1,2,3]. Yet despite encouraging statistics that now show near even numbers of women (48%) and men (52%) enrolled in US medical schools [4,5], vast inequalities remain. Radiology is just one example of the persistent gender gap that plagues many medical specialties, with women representing fewer than 30% of total practicing radiologists and trainees in the United States [6,7,8]. Radiology educators have long debated the most effective means by which to improve the recruitment of women to our field, but they have managed to identify only potential contributing factors [9,10]. OBSTACLES TO RECRUITING WOMEN IN RADIOLOGYOne barrier to recruitment commonly cited in the literature is the widespread presence of misconceptions regarding radiology as a career [7]. Common misconceptions include: too little impact on patient care, a dark and isolated working environment located far from patient care areas, and too competitive a match process to get a residency position [5,7,11]. Unfortunately, because radiology is absent from the core curricula of most medical schools in the United States, these false stereotypes remain unchecked in the minds of most students when they make their specialty decisions [7,9,10].In addition to the long-held misconceptions about radiology, the poor exposure that medical students get to the field is itself a serious obstacle to the recruitment of women [5,10]. Radiology must compete for student interest against specialties that have the luxury of one or more required rotations within the medical school curriculum. Because radiology is not a required core clerkship at most medical schools, the specialty cannot demonstrate to students just how patient-centered and interactive it really is. Students aren't afforded the opportunity to see the value that radiologists bring to patient care or to even imagine themselves in a radiology career. Instead, the misconceptions go unabated and eventually help to exclude radiology as a potential career choice in the minds of most students.A third obstacle to recruiting women to radiology is the persistent shortage of women to serve as visual role models for students [9,10,12,13,14]. The importance of female role models in shaping the career decisions of women has been established in many medical fields including radiology, surgery, and internal medicine [15,16,17]. The educational theorist Etienne Wenger claims that medical students decide on specialties by drawing upon their medical school experiences to visualize themselves working within a particular field, an exercise he calls "paradigmatic trajectories" or career trajectories [13,18,19,20]. To do this, students need to physically see role models with which they can identify to know that specific careers possible for them [13,20]. The shortage of women in radiology may simply make it too difficult for female medical students to see themselves in the profession.

show abstract

Diversity, Inclusion, and Representation: It Is Time to Act

Cited by 68 publications

References 16 publications

American Society of Clinical Oncology Strategic Plan for Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Oncology Workforce

American Society of Clinical Oncology Strategic Plan for Increasing Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Oncology Workforce

A Mentorship and Networking Group for Women in Radiology

The Illusion of Choice: Gender Segregation and the Challenge of Recruiting Women to Radiology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About