Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
-
Female representation in academic medicine is increasing without proportional increases in female representation at senior ranks. The purpose of this study is to describe the gender representation in academic gastroenterology (GI) and compare publication productivity, academic rank, and career duration between male and female gastroenterologists. ⋯ A gender gap exists in the number and proportion of women in academic GI; however, after correcting for career duration, productivity measures that consider quantity and impact are similar for male and female faculty. Women holding senior faculty positions are equally productive as their male counterparts. Early and continued career mentorship will likely lead to continued increases in the rise of women in academic rank.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Coaching to Augment Mentoring to Achieve Faculty Diversity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
The Academy for Future Science Faculty (the Academy) is a novel coaching intervention for biomedical PhD students designed to address limitations in previous efforts to promote faculty diversity. Unlike traditional research mentoring, the Academy includes both group and individual coaching, coaches have no research or evaluation roles with the students, and it is based on social science theories. The authors present a qualitative case study of one of the coaching groups and provide statistical analyses indicating whether one year in the Academy effects students' perceptions of the achievability and desirability of an academic career. ⋯ Early results suggest that an academic career coaching model can effectively supplement traditional research mentoring and promote persistence toward academic careers.
-
More than a decade ago, women achieved parity with men in the number of matriculants to medical school, nearly one-third of the faculty of medical schools were women, and there were some women deans and department chairs. These trends were promising, but today there are still significant differences in pay, academic rank, and leadership positions for women compared with men in academic medicine. ⋯ The author points to the findings presented in the articles from the Research Partnership on Women in Biomedical Careers in this issue, as well as research being published elsewhere, as an evidence base for the ongoing discussion of gender equity in academic medicine. More attention to culture and the working environment will be needed to achieve true parity for women in academic medical careers.
-
Women represent approximately half of students entering medical schools and more than half of those entering PhD programs. When advancing through the academic and professional fields, however, women continually face barriers that men do not. ⋯ Specific areas of focus outlined by the authors include facilitating women's access to formal and informal professional networks, acknowledging and addressing the gender pay gap as well as the lack of research funding awarded to women in the field, and updating workplace policies that have not evolved to accommodate women's lifestyles. As academic institutions seek access to top talent and the means to develop those individuals capable of generating the change medicine and science needs, the authors urge leaders and change agents within academic medicine to address the systemic barriers to gender equity that impede us from achieving the mission to improve the health of all.
-
In 2008, the National Institutes of Health funded 14 R01 grants to study causal factors that promote and support women's biomedical careers. The Research Partnership on Women in Biomedical Careers, a multi-institutional collaboration of the investigators, is one product of this initiative. A comprehensive framework is needed to address change at many levels-department, institution, academic community, and beyond-and enable gender equity in the development of successful biomedical careers. ⋯ To effect change, culture must be addressed both within and beyond academic health centers (AHCs). Leaders within AHCs must examine their institutions' processes, resources, and assessment for fairness and transparency; mobilize personnel and financial resources to implement evidence-based initiatives; and assign accountability for providing transparent progress assessments. Beyond AHCs, organizations must examine their operations and implement change to ensure parity of funding, research, and leadership opportunities as well as transparency of assessment and accreditation.