M. Fassiotto is associate dean for faculty development and diversity, Office of Faculty Development and Diversity, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
B. Flores is research and program officer, Office of Faculty Development and Diversity, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Acad Med. 2020 Dec;95(12):1844-1852. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003720.
As educators, researchers, clinicians, and administrators, faculty serve pivotal roles in academic medical centers (AMCs). Thus, the quality of faculty members' experiences is inseparable from an AMC's success. In seeking new methods to assess equity in advancement in academic medicine, the authors developed the Rank Equity Index (REI)-adapted from the Executive Parity Index, a scale previously implemented within the business sector-to examine national data on gender and racial/ethnic equity across faculty ranks. The REI was employed on self-reported demographic data, collected by the Association of American Medical Colleges, from U.S. medical school faculty in 2017, to make pairwise rank comparisons of the professoriate by demographic characteristics and department. Overall results indicated that women did not attain parity at any pairwise rank comparison, while men were above parity at all ranks. Similar results were observed across all departments surveyed: women in the basic sciences had REIs closest to parity, women in pediatrics had the highest representation but had REIs that were further from parity than REIs in the basic sciences, and women in surgery demonstrated the lowest REIs. Nationally, REIs were below 1.00 for all racial/ethnic group rank comparisons except for White and, in one case, multiple-race non-Hispanic/Latinx. Across all analyzed departments, Black/African American, Asian, Hispanic/Latinx, and multiple-race Hispanic/Latinx faculty had REIs below parity at all ranks except in 2 cases. In a comparison of 2017 and 2007 data, REIs across both race/ethnicity and gender were lower in 2007 for nearly all groups. REI analyses can highlight inequities in faculty rank that may be masked when using aggregate faculty proportions, which do not account for rank. The REI provides AMCs with a new tool to better analyze institutional data to inform efforts to increase parity across all faculty ranks.
作为教育者、研究人员、临床医生和管理人员，教师在学术医疗中心（AMC）中扮演着至关重要的角色。因此，教师的体验质量与 AMC 的成功密不可分。为了寻找评估学术医学中晋升公平性的新方法，作者开发了等级公平指数（REI）——该指数改编自高管平等指数，该指数之前在商业领域实施——以审查全国范围内关于性别和种族/族裔公平性的教职员工等级数据。REI 基于美国医学学院协会从美国医学院教师 2017 年收集的自我报告人口统计数据，通过人口统计特征和部门对教授进行了两两排名比较。总体结果表明，在任何两两排名比较中，女性都没有达到平等，而男性在所有等级中都高于平等。在所有调查部门中都观察到了类似的结果：基础科学领域的女性的 REI 最接近平等，儿科领域的女性代表性最高，但 REI 比基础科学领域的 REI 更远离平等，而外科领域的女性则表现出最低的 REI。在全国范围内，除了白人，在一个案例中，还有多个种族的非西班牙裔/拉丁裔，所有种族/族裔等级比较的 REI 均低于 1.00。在对所有分析部门的研究中，除了两个案例外，黑人/非裔美国人、亚洲人、西班牙裔/拉丁裔和多个种族的西班牙裔/拉丁裔教职员工在所有等级中都低于平等。在 2007 年和 2017 年的数据比较中，几乎所有群体的 2007 年的 REI 都低于种族/族裔和性别。REI 分析可以突出教职员工等级中可能被掩盖的不公平现象，而使用不考虑等级的教职员工总数来衡量这些不公平现象。REI 为 AMC 提供了一个新工具，可以更好地分析机构数据，为增加所有教职员工等级的平等提供信息。
