From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine; the School of Medicine, Imperial College London; the Yorkshire and Humber Foundation School; and the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The John Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020 Sep;146(3):690-697. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000007089.
Gender parity remains elusive in academic plastic surgery. It is unknown whether this disparity is attributable to differences in qualifications or to the glass ceiling of gender bias. To parse this, the authors compared academic titles and departmental leadership of female academic plastic surgeons to a matched group of their male counterparts.
The authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of academic plastic surgeons. The authors identified faculty, sex, academic rank, and leadership positions from plastic surgery residency program websites. The authors then collected details on training institution, advanced degrees, years in practice, and h-index for use as independent variables. The authors performed a propensity score analysis to 1:1 match male and female academic plastic surgeons.
A total of 818 academic plastic surgeons were included. The cohort was predominately male [n = 658 (81 percent)], with a median 12 years in practice and a median h-index of 9. Before matching, men had more years in practice (13 years versus 9 years; p < 0.0001), a greater h-index (11 versus 5; p < 0.0001), were more likely to be professors (34 percent versus 13 percent; p < 0.0001), and held more leadership positions than women (41 percent versus 30 percent; p = 0.0221). Following matching, gender parity was demonstrated in academic rank and departmental leadership.
Differences in training, qualifications, career length, and academic productivity may account for the leadership gap in academic plastic surgery. Gendered difficulties in reaching qualification benchmarks must be addressed before gender parity in promotion can be achieved.
在学术整形外科学领域,性别平等仍然难以实现。这种差异是由于资格的不同,还是由于性别偏见的玻璃天花板造成的,目前还不得而知。为了分析这个问题,作者将女性学术整形外科医生与男性同行的学术头衔和部门领导进行了比较。
作者对学术整形外科医生进行了横断面分析。作者从整形外科学住院医师培训计划的网站上确定了教职员工、性别、学术职称和领导职位。然后,作者收集了培训机构、高级学位、从业年限和 h 指数等详细信息,作为自变量。作者进行了倾向评分分析,以 1:1 的比例匹配男性和女性学术整形外科医生。
共纳入 818 名学术整形外科医生。该队列主要为男性[ n = 658(81%)],平均从业年限为 12 年,h 指数中位数为 9。在匹配之前,男性的从业年限更长(13 年比 9 年;p < 0.0001),h 指数更高(11 比 5;p < 0.0001),更有可能是教授(34%比 13%;p < 0.0001),并且担任的领导职务多于女性(41%比 30%;p = 0.0221)。匹配后,学术职称和部门领导方面实现了性别均等。
培训、资格、职业年限和学术生产力方面的差异可能是学术整形外科学领导差距的原因。在实现晋升性别平等之前,必须解决在达到资格标准方面的性别困难。