Women leaders in Cardiology. Contemporary profile of the WHO European region

Abstract

Aims Women’s participation is steadily growing in medical schools, but they are still not sufficiently represented in cardiology, particularly in cardiology leadership positions. We present the contemporary distribution of women leaders in cardiology departments in the World Health Organization European region. Methods and results Between August and December 2020 we applied purposive sampling to collect data and analyse gender distribution of heads of cardiology department in university/third level hospitals in 23 countries: Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, North Macedonia, Morocco, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. Age, cardiology subspecialty, and number of scientific publications were recorded for a subgroup of cardiology leaders for whom data was available. A total of 849 cardiology departments were analysed. Women leaders were only 30% (254/849) and were younger than their men counterpart (♀ 52.2 ± 7.7 years-old versus ♂ 58.1 ± 7.6 years-old, p = 0.00001). Most women leaders were non-interventional experts (♀ 82% versus ♂ 46%, p < 0.00001), and had significantly fewer scientific publications than men [♀ 16 (IQR 2-41) publications versus ♂ 44 (IQR 9-175) publications, p < 0.00001]. Conclusion Across the World Health Organization European region, there is a significant gender disparity in cardiology leadership positions. Fostering a diverse and inclusive workplace is a priority in order to achieve the full potential and leverage the full talents of both women and men.

Women in mechanical circulatory support: She persisted!

“…While the magnitude of the gap may vary between the countries and continents, disparities based on gender and vertical segregation of women in cardiology and CT surgery are pervasive across the globe. Borelli et al performed a gender-based analysis of the distribution of leadership positions within cardiology departments in a cohort of 23 European countries, finding significant disparities similar to the United States ( 20 ). Although different perspectives and hypotheses are postulated for these inequities, the underlying reasons are complex and multifold and differ a great deal depending on the domain of practice, type of practice and level of career.…”

A report from the Irish women in cardiology survey, exploring Europe’s largest gender gap in cardiology

“…Recent work performed by the Pink International Young Academy of Cardiology group demonstrated that in Europe, countries with the most national gender parity had the worst representation of female leaders in cardiology. 5 Conversely, Russia and Morocco who have the most female cardiology leaders, have the worst parity in gender nationally.…”

Did the ‘Digital Experience’ improve women’s representation at the European Society of Cardiology congress?

“…Furthermore, a recent study found that women were leaders of 30% (254/849) of cardiology departments in Europe. 7 Women leaders were younger than their men counterparts (mean 52 years vs 58 years, respectively) and had significantly fewer scientific publications than men (median 16 publications vs 44 publications, respectively). Considering this evidence, the overall of 37% women as faculty and abstract presenters at the 2021 congress broadly reflects women's general representation within the ESC and in cardiology departments in Europe.…”

“…As of 2021, there are approximately 105 000 members of the ESC (including all association free and paying members, fellows, ESC professional members, national cardiac society members, councils, working group members), of whom 35.7% are women, 60.1% are men and 4.2% are of unknown gender. Furthermore, a recent study found that women were leaders of 30% (254/849) of cardiology departments in Europe 7. Women leaders were younger than their men counterparts (mean 52 years vs 58 years, respectively) and had significantly fewer scientific publications than men (median 16 publications vs 44 publications, respectively).…”