Peek at the glass ceiling: gender distribution of leadership among emergency medicine residency programs

Abstract

BackgroundA gender gap in faculty rank at academic institutions exists; however, data among graduate medical education (GME) programmes are limited. There is a need to assess gender disparities in GME leadership, as a lack of female leadership may affect recruitment, role modelling and mentorship of female trainees. This cross-sectional study aimed to describe the current state of gender in programme leadership (department chair, programme director (PD), associate/assistant PD (APD) and clerkship director (CD)) at accredited Emergency Medicine (EM) programmes in the USA to determine whether a gender gap exists.MethodsA survey was distributed to EM residency programmes in the USA assessing demographics and gender distribution among programme leadership. If no response was received, information was collected via the programme’s website. Data were organised by position, region and length of the programme. We obtained data on the number of female EM physicians in practice and in training/fellowship in 2017 from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Data analysis was completed using descriptive statistics and χ2 analysis.ResultsOf the 226 programmes contacted, 148 responded to the survey (66.3%). Among US EM residency programmes, 11.2% of chairs, 34.6% of PDs, 40.5% of APDs and 46.5% of CDs are women. The percentage of female chairs is significantly lower than the percentage of women in practice or in training in EM. The percentage of female PDs did not differ from the percentage of women in practice or in training in EM. The percentage of female APDs and CDs was significantly higher than the percentage of women in practice but did not differ from the percentage in training. There was wide variability across regions. Four-year programmes had more women in PD and APD positions compared with 3-year programmes (p=0.01).ConclusionsWhile the representation of women in educational roles is encouraging, the number of women holding the rank of chairperson remains disproportionately low. Further studies are needed to evaluate reasons for this and strategies to increase gender equality in leadership roles.

Salary disparities based on gender in academic emergency medicine leadership

“…While women are underrepresented in executive leadership positions, education leadership roles did have a significantly greater representation of women compared to other leadership roles. This is similar to previous findings in the literature 21,22 . Future work should investigate education positions to learn if anything about these roles, systems, and/or processes can be used to increase the number of women in other leadership positions.…”

“…This is similar to previous findings in the literature. 21,22 Future work should investigate education positions to learn if anything about these roles, systems, and/or processes can be used to increase the number of women in other leadership positions.…”

Diversity begets diversity: Factors contributing to emergency medicine residency gender diversity

“…Previous studies have found that female emergency physicians hold the role of assistant PD at a higher-than-anticipated rate compared with the current number of women in EM but in proportion to the current number of female EM residents. 8 Because the assistant PD positions are often filled by early-career emergency physicians, this may explain why these figures more closely mirror the percentage of women in EM training.…”

“…7 As of the 2018 to 2019 academic year, female faculty comprised 11.2% of chairs, 34.6% of program directors (PDs), 40.5% of associate/assistant PDs, and 46.5% of clerkship directors in U.S. EM residency programs. 8 In addition to EM faculty, prior studies have examined EM resident and chief resident gender distribution.…”

Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

“…42,62,63 Over a 10-year period, the probabilities of promotion were lower and probabilities of attrition were higher for UIM faculty and women. 41 UIM physicians are less likely to hold administrative leadership positions in various departments, 3,[64][65][66] serve as program directors, 67,68 receive NIH research awards, 3 grants, 26 and receive tenure 69 than their non-UIM peers. Even after adjusting for tenure status, degree, gender, and NIH award status, UIM Table 4.…”