Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor.
Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Apr 1;7(4):e246040. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.6040.
Despite increasing evidence and recognition of persistent gender disparities in academic medicine, qualitative data detailing the association of gender-based experiences with career progression remain sparse, particularly at the mid- to senior-career stage.
To investigate the role gender has played in everyday professional experiences of mid- to senior-career women clinician-scientists and their perceptions of gender-related barriers experienced across their careers.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this qualitative study, a total of 60 of 159 invited clinician-scientists who received National Institutes of Health K08 or K23 awards between 2006 and 2009 and responded to a survey in 2021 agreed to participate. Invitees were selected using random, purposive sampling to support sample heterogeneity. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted January to May 2022. For this study, interviews from 31 women were analyzed using the framework approach to thematic analysis. Data analyses were performed between August and October 2023.
Descriptive themes of participant experiences of gender and gender-based barriers in academic medicine.
A total of 31 women clinician-scientists (8 identifying as Asian [25.8%], 14 identifying as White [45.2%], and 9 identifying as members of a minority group underrepresented in medicine [29.0%]; 14 aged 40-49 years [45.2%] and 14 aged 50-59 years [45.2%]) were included. Among them, 17 participants (54.8%) had children who required adult supervision or care, 7 participants (22.6%) had children who did not require supervision or care, and 6 participants (19.4%) did not have children. There were 4 dominant themes identified within participant experiences in academic medicine: the mental burden of gendered expectations at work and home, inequitable treatment of women in bureaucratic processes, subtle and less subtle professional exclusion of women, and value of communities built on shared identities, experiences, and solidarity.
This study found that women perceived the institution of academic medicine as a male-centric system misaligned with the needs of women, with associated feelings of exclusion, disillusionment, and loss of trust in their institutions. Findings suggest that the confluence of domestic obligations and unaccommodating institutional environments may make it difficult for women clinician-scientists to achieve established timelines of career progression and productivity; these findings may have long-term implications for the well-being and retention of women in academic medicine.
尽管越来越多的证据和认识表明,学术医学领域仍然存在持续的性别差距,但详细描述基于性别的经历与职业发展之间关联的定性数据仍然很少,尤其是在中级到高级职业阶段。
调查性别在中级到高级职业女性临床科学家的日常专业经历中所扮演的角色,以及她们在整个职业生涯中所经历的与性别相关的障碍的看法。
设计、设置和参与者:在这项定性研究中,共有 159 名受邀的临床科学家中的 60 名接受了美国国立卫生研究院 2006 年至 2009 年期间的 K08 或 K23 奖,并在 2021 年对调查做出了回应,同意参与。邀请对象采用随机、有针对性的抽样选择,以支持样本的异质性。半结构式深入访谈于 2022 年 1 月至 5 月进行。在这项研究中,使用框架方法对 31 名女性参与者的经验进行了主题分析。数据分析于 2023 年 8 月至 10 月之间进行。
参与者在学术医学中经历的性别和基于性别的障碍的描述性主题。
共有 31 名女性临床科学家(8 名自认为是亚洲人[25.8%],14 名自认为是白人[45.2%],9 名自认为是医学领域代表性不足的少数群体成员[29.0%];14 名年龄在 40-49 岁[45.2%],14 名年龄在 50-59 岁[45.2%])被纳入。其中,17 名参与者(54.8%)有需要成人监督或照顾的孩子,7 名参与者(22.6%)有不需要监督或照顾的孩子,6 名参与者(19.4%)没有孩子。参与者在学术医学中的经历中有 4 个主要主题:工作和家庭中性别期望的精神负担、女性在官僚程序中受到不公平待遇、对女性的微妙和不那么微妙的职业排斥以及基于共同身份、经历和团结建立的社区的价值。
这项研究发现,女性认为学术医学机构是一个以男性为中心的系统,与女性的需求不匹配,这导致了她们的排斥感、幻灭感和对机构的信任丧失。研究结果表明,家庭责任和不适应的机构环境的融合可能使女性临床科学家难以实现既定的职业发展和生产力时间表;这些发现可能对女性在学术医学领域的幸福感和保留率产生长期影响。