Gender disparities in gastroenterology fellowship director positions in the United States

Woodward, Zibing J.; Chinchilla‐Rodríguez, Zaida; Jou, Janice H.; Keyashian, Kian; Chen, Yiyi; Thomas, Charles R.; Elta, Grace H.; D’Souza, Susan

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2017.01.019

Cited by 42 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No studies beyond those identified were revealed by the 17 contacted scholars. Original data were available for 40 studies, described in 42 articles5 15 52–91 (see online supplementary material 1 for an overview of included studies).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where questionnaires were used, the response rates ranged from 22% to 100%. Thirteen studies were cross-sectional surveys of publicly available or archives of data,54 57 59 60 65 67 69 72 74 77–79 90 and one study was a case report 71…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of the studies have methodological limitations. Twelve studies used websites and publicly available data 15 54–56 59 63 67 69 78 87 90. Six studies did not reveal how their questionnaires were developed or if they were tested 63 65 66 83 84 89 91.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-four studies reported the extent of women’s leadership in academic medicine by comparing the number of women attaining leadership positions to the number of men 54–60 63 67 69 70 72 74 77–84 87 90 91. The studies, however, differed in their approaches and which organisational positions they chose to highlight (table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Women’s leadership in academic medicine: a systematic review of extent, condition and interventions

Alwazzan

Al‐Angari

2020

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesBecause culture reflects leadership, the making of diverse and inclusive medical schools begins with diversity among leaders. The inclusion of women leaders remains elusive, warranting a systematic exploration of scholarship in this area. We ask: (1) What is the extent of women’s leadership in academic medicine? (2) What factors influence women’s leadership? (3) What is the impact of leadership development programmes?DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesA systematic search of six online databases (OvidMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and ERIC) from the earliest date available to April 2018 was conducted. Bridging searches were conducted from April 2018 until October 2019.Eligibility criteria(1) Peer-reviewed; (2) English; (3) Quantitative studies (prospective and retrospective cohort, cross-sectional and preintervention/postintervention); evaluating (4) The extent of women’s leadership at departmental, college and graduate programme levels; (5) Factors influencing women’s leadership; (6) Leadership development programmes. Quantitative studies that explored women’s leadership in journal editorial boards and professional societies and qualitative study designs were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers screened retrieved data of abstracts and full-texts for eligibility, assessment and extracted study-level data independently. The included studies were objectively appraised using the Medical Education Research Quality Study Instrument with an inter-rater reliability of (κ=0.93).ResultsOf 4024 records retrieved, 40 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extent of women’s leadership was determined through gender distribution of leadership positions. Women’s leadership emergence was hindered by institutional requirements such as research productivity and educational credentials, while women’s enactment of leadership was hindered by lack of policy implementation. Leadership development programmes had a positive influence on women’s individual enactment of leadership and on medical schools’ cultures.ConclusionsScholarship on women’s leadership inadvertently produced institute-centric rather than women-centric research. More robust contextualised scholarship is needed to provide practical-recommendations; drawing on existing conceptual frameworks and using more rigorous research methods.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Women’s leadership in academic medicine: a systematic review of extent, condition and interventions

Alwazzan

Al‐Angari

2020

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite this, there remains a dearth of women in leadership positions in national societies and in the highest rungs of academia. For example, in 2015 women constituted < 20% of GI fellowship program directors and < 10% of section/division chiefs [2,3]. While there has been some positive change with a recent increase in women in executive leadership of GI societies (AGA, AASLD, ACG, ASGE), this has not translated into publication leadership.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%