UNASSIGNED: Gender gap is a neologism that identifies the disparity between social and professional conditions experienced by females compared to males. The disparity increases as one ascends the academic hierarchy. In recent years, the debate has expanded, and more options have been planned for the elimination of the current gender gap.
UNASSIGNED: This research was conducted by examining the landscape of the gender gap, particularly in the academic forensic medicine field. Our analysis involved reviewing papers published between 2006 and 2024, identified through electronic database searches (PubMed). The search terms used were: \"gender gap\" AND \"academic\" AND \"medicine\" AND \"leadership.\" In total, we analyzed 85 papers. Additionally, we examined data from forensic medicine residency programs.
UNASSIGNED: The representation of women in medicine is well-known. Despite the increasing number of women in leadership positions in medicine, they still lag significantly behind men. These data highlight a situation that could be seen as grounds for an accusation of \"academic abuse\". In the Italian forensic residency programs, less than 20% are led by women, and among these, not all hold the rank of full professor. Although a certain rebalancing is already underway, the gap is still significant. There are already regulations obliging local authorities to promote gender equality in councils, companies, and institutions under their jurisdiction. It would be desirable to consider minimum quotas for female participation in university competitions. This would be a first step toward eliminating the gender gap in academic and forensic medical fields.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The number of publications on the subject of diversity, equity, and inclusion has surged in the last 5 years. However, a systematic review of this topic has not been published.
METHODS: Six top plastic surgery journals were queried from 2018 to 2023 using the search term \"diversity.\" Methods, conclusions, and recommendations were tabulated.
RESULTS: A total of 138 publications were identified; 68 studies presented data suitable for analysis. All studies were retrospective. Currently, over 40% of plastic surgery residency applicants are women. The proportion of women in integrated plastic surgery residents is now 43%. In 2021 and 2022, the percentage of female first-year residents exceeded men. The percentage of female presenters at meetings (34%) is double the number in the workforce (17%). Twenty-five percent of academic faculty positions and 22% of program director positions are now held by women. Underrepresented minorities account for fewer than 10% of applicants to integrated plastic surgery residencies.
CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of Black and Hispanic applicants to integrated plastic surgery residencies (6% and 8%, respectively) mirrors the proportion of Black and Hispanic medical students (7% and 6%, respectively). Numerous recommendations have been made to increase the proportion of underrepresented minorities in plastic surgery programs.
CONCLUSIONS: The representation of women in plastic surgery has increased dramatically. A lack of Hispanics and Blacks reflects a small pool of applicants, as opposed to a \"leaky pipeline.\"

OBJECTIVE: The gender gap in promotion in academic medicine is well established. However, few studies have reported gender differences in promotion adjusted for scholarly production and national or international reputation, namely, career duration, publications, grant funding, and leadership positions. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the differences between men and women in achieving benchmarks for promotion and analyze where such differences lie geographically and within specialties.
METHODS: A systematic search of Academic Search Premier, Business Source Complete, Cochrane Library, ERIC, GenderWatch, Google Scholar, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from inception to August 17, 2022. All studies that reported the number of male and female full professors on medical school faculty were included. The primary outcome was the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for promotion to full professor for women compared with men.
RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. The unadjusted OR for promotion to full professor for women was 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.41). Sixteen studies reported an AOR. The pooled AOR of promotion for women to full professor was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.46-0.77). The AOR for promotion to full professor was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.34-0.88) in surgery and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.57-1.11) in internal medicine. Statistical heterogeneity was high ( Q = 66.6, I2 = 79.4%, P < .001). On meta-regression, 77% of the heterogeneity was from studies outside the United States, where more disparity was reported (AOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.22-0.38).
CONCLUSIONS: Most studies continued to find decreased promotion of women. Gender disparity was particularly notable in surgery and in studies from outside the United States. The results suggest that differences in promotion were due to differences in productivity and leadership and to gender bias.

Physician burnout continues to increase in prevalence and disproportionately affects women physicians. Breast imaging is a woman-dominated subspeciality, and therefore, worsening burnout among women physicians may have significant repercussions on the future of the breast imaging profession. Systemic and organizational factors have been shown to be the greatest contributors to burnout beyond individual factors. Based on the Mayo Model, we review the evidence regarding the 7 major organizational contributors to physician burnout and their potential disproportionate impacts on women breast radiologists. The major organizational factors discussed are work-life integration, control and flexibility, workload and job demands, efficiency and resources, finding meaning in work, social support and community at work, and organizational culture and values. We also propose potential strategies for institutions and practices to mitigate burnout in women breast imaging radiologists. Many of these strategies could also benefit men breast imaging radiologists, who are at risk for burnout as well.

UNASSIGNED: Sex-based research in medicine has revealed inequities against females on almost every metric at almost every career stage; ophthalmology is no exception.
UNASSIGNED: To systematically review the experiences of females in ophthalmology (FiO) from training through practice in high-income countries (HICs).
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review of English-language studies, published between January 1990 and May 2022, relating to FiO in HICs was performed. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were searched, as well as the Journal of Academic Ophthalmology as it was not indexed in the searched databases. Studies were organized by theme at each career stage, starting in medical school when an interest in ophthalmology is expressed, and extending up to retirement.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 91 studies, 87 cross-sectional and 4 cohort, were included. In medical school, mentorship and recruitment of female students into ophthalmology was influenced by sex bias, with fewer females identifying with ophthalmologist mentors and gender stereotypes perpetuated in reference letters written by both male and female referees. In residency, females had unequal learning opportunities, with lower surgical case volumes than male trainees and fewer females pursued fellowships in lucrative subspecialties. In practice, female ophthalmologists had lower incomes, less academic success, and poorer representation in leadership roles. Female ophthalmologists had a greater scholarly impact factor than their male counterparts, but this was only after approximately 30 years of publication experience. Pervasive throughout all stages of training and practice was the experience of greater sexual harassment among females from both patients and colleagues. Despite these disparities, some studies found that females reported equal overall career satisfaction rating with males in ophthalmology, whereas others suggested higher burnout rates.
UNASSIGNED: Ophthalmology is approaching sex parity, however, the increase in the proportion of females in ophthalmology had not translated to an increase in female representation in leadership positions. Sex disparities persisted across many domains including recruitment, training, practice patterns, academic productivity, and income. Interventions may improve sex equity in the field.

Sponsorship describes a set of actions wherein an influential champion (sponsor) uses their position to actively support a colleague\'s career by helping them gain visibility, recognition, and/or positions. There is growing awareness of the importance of sponsorship for career advancement in academic medicine, particularly for women and those who are historically underrepresented and excluded in medicine (UIM). This scoping review examines the current landscape of evidence, and knowledge gaps, on sponsorship as it relates to career advancement in academic medicine for women and UIM faculty. We searched peer-reviewed literature in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science (WoS) over the past 50 years (from 1973 through July 2023). Sixteen studies were included in the final review. We found relative consensus on sponsorship definition and value to career advancement. Heterogeneity in study design limited our ability to directly compare study outcomes. All included studies focused on gender differences in sponsorship: two of four quantitative studies found men were more likely to receive sponsorship, one reported no gender differences, and one was insufficiently powered. All but one of the qualitative studies reported gender differences, with women less likely to access or be identified for sponsorship. The mixed-methods studies suggested sponsorship may vary by career stage. Only two studies analyzed sponsorship for UIM populations. The existing data are inconclusive regarding best ways to measure and assess sponsorship, what institutional support (e.g., structured programs, formal recognition, or incentives for sponsorship) should look like, and at what career stage sponsorship is most important. Addressing this knowledge gap will be critically important for understanding what sponsorship best practices, if any, should be used to promote equity in career advancement in academic medicine. We advocate for commitment at the institutional and national levels to develop new infrastructure for transparently and equitably supporting women and UIM in career advancement.

暂无摘要。

Career satisfaction among women surgeons have been well-reported in literature. This study provides a comprehensive review to understand career satisfaction and its contributory factors among female surgeons.
PRISMA guidelines were utilized to extract studies for systematic review and meta-analysis. Outcomes assessed included surgical career satisfaction, career reconsideration, work-life balance, and gender bias and discrimination (GBD). Odds ratios were calculated comparing women to men for each outcome.
This study demonstrated that female surgeons were less likely to endorse overall career satisfaction (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85) and work-life balance satisfaction (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40-0.92) compared to male surgeons. It also revealed that women surgeons were more likely to report workplace GBD (OR, 13.82; 95% CI, 4.37-43.65).
Future interventions may be necessary to increase career and work-life balance satisfaction among women surgeons while reconciling the need to ensure they are adequately informed of the obligations of a surgical career.

This paper stems from a desire to deepen our own understanding of why women might \'say no\' when allies and sponsors offer or create opportunities for advancement, leadership or recognition. The resulting disparity between representation by men and women in leadership positions, invited keynote speakers and publication counts in academic medicine is a stubborn and wicked problem that requires a synthesis of knowledge across multidisciplinary literature. Acknowledging the complexity of this topic, we selected a narrative critical review methodology to explore reasons why one man\'s opportunity might be a woman\'s burden in academic medicine.
We engaged with an iterative process of identifying, reviewing and interpreting literature from Psychology (cognitive, industrial and educational), Sociology, Health Professions Education and Business, placing no restrictions on context or year of publication. Knowledge synthesis and interpretation were guided by our combined expertise, lived experience, consultations with experts outside the author team and these guiding questions: (1) Why might women have less time for career advancement opportunities? (2) Why do women have less time for research and leadership? (3) How are these disparities maintained?
Turning down an opportunity may be a symptom of a much larger issue. The power of social expectations, culture and gender stereotypes remains a resistant force against calls for action. Consequently, women disproportionately take on other tasks that are not as well recognised. This disparity is maintained through social consequences for breaking with firmly entrenched stereotypes.
Popular strategies like \'lean into opportunities\', \'fake it till you make it\' and \'overcome your imposter syndrome\' suggest that women are standing in their own way. Critically, these axioms ignore powerful systemic barriers that shape these choices and opportunities. We offer strategies that allies, sponsors and peers can implement to offset the power of stereotypes.