Reshma Jagsi1, Cathie Biga2, Athena Poppas3, George P Rodgers4, Mary N Walsh5, Patrick J White6, Colleen McKendry7, Joseph Sasson6, Phillip J Schulte7, Pamela S Douglas7. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: rjagsi@med.umich.edu. 2. Cardiovascular Management of Illinois, Woodridge, Illinois. 3. Rhode Island Hospital/Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 4. Seton Heart Institute, University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, Austin, Texas. 5. St. Vincent Heart Center of Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana. 6. MedAxiom, Neptune Beach, Florida. 7. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Much remains unknown about experiences, including working activities and pay, of women in cardiology, which is a predominantly male specialty. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to describe the working activities and pay of female cardiologists compared with their male colleagues and to determine whether sex differences in compensation exist after accounting for differences in work activities and other characteristics. METHODS: The personal, job, and practice characteristics of a national sample of practicing cardiologists were described according to sex. We applied the Peters-Belson technique and multivariate regression analysis to evaluate whether gender differences in compensation existed after accounting for differences in other measured characteristics. The study used 2013 data reported by practice administrators to MedAxiom, a subscription-based service provider to cardiology practices. Data regarding cardiologists from 161 U.S. practices were included, and the study sample included 2,679 subjects (229 women and 2,450 men). RESULTS: Women were more likely to be specialized in general/noninvasive cardiology (53.1% vs. 28.2%), and a lower proportion (11.4% vs. 39.3%) reported an interventional subspecialty compared with men. Job characteristics that differed according to sex included the proportion working full-time (79.9% vs. 90.9%; p < 0.001), the mean number of half-days worked (387 vs. 406 days; p = 0.001), and mean work relative value units generated (7,404 vs. 9,497; p < 0.001) for women and men, respectively. Peters-Belson analysis revealed that based on measured job and productivity characteristics, the women in this sample would have been expected to have a mean salary that was $31,749 (95% confidence interval: $16,303 to $48,028) higher than that actually observed. Multivariate analysis confirmed the direction and magnitude of the independent association between sex and salary. CONCLUSIONS: Men and women practicing cardiology in this national sample had different job activities and salaries. Substantial sex-based salary differences existed even after adjusting for measures of personal, job, and practice characteristics.
BACKGROUND: Much remains unknown about experiences, including working activities and pay, of women in cardiology, which is a predominantly male specialty. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to describe the working activities and pay of female cardiologists compared with their male colleagues and to determine whether sex differences in compensation exist after accounting for differences in work activities and other characteristics. METHODS: The personal, job, and practice characteristics of a national sample of practicing cardiologists were described according to sex. We applied the Peters-Belson technique and multivariate regression analysis to evaluate whether gender differences in compensation existed after accounting for differences in other measured characteristics. The study used 2013 data reported by practice administrators to MedAxiom, a subscription-based service provider to cardiology practices. Data regarding cardiologists from 161 U.S. practices were included, and the study sample included 2,679 subjects (229 women and 2,450 men). RESULTS:Women were more likely to be specialized in general/noninvasive cardiology (53.1% vs. 28.2%), and a lower proportion (11.4% vs. 39.3%) reported an interventional subspecialty compared with men. Job characteristics that differed according to sex included the proportion working full-time (79.9% vs. 90.9%; p < 0.001), the mean number of half-days worked (387 vs. 406 days; p = 0.001), and mean work relative value units generated (7,404 vs. 9,497; p < 0.001) for women and men, respectively. Peters-Belson analysis revealed that based on measured job and productivity characteristics, the women in this sample would have been expected to have a mean salary that was $31,749 (95% confidence interval: $16,303 to $48,028) higher than that actually observed. Multivariate analysis confirmed the direction and magnitude of the independent association between sex and salary. CONCLUSIONS:Men and women practicing cardiology in this national sample had different job activities and salaries. Substantial sex-based salary differences existed even after adjusting for measures of personal, job, and practice characteristics.
Authors: A D Timmis; C Baker; S Banerjee; A L Calver; A Dornhorst; K M English; J Flint; M E Speechly-Dick; D Turner Journal: Heart Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Kent A Griffith; Abigail Stewart; Dana Sambuco; Rochelle DeCastro; Peter A Ubel Journal: Acad Med Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: M C Limacher; C A Zaher; M N Walsh; W J Wolf; P S Douglas; J B Schwartz; J S Wright; D P Bodycombe Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Shruti Jolly; Kent A Griffith; Rochelle DeCastro; Abigail Stewart; Peter Ubel; Reshma Jagsi Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-03-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: P L Carr; A S Ash; R H Friedman; A Scaramucci; R C Barnett; L Szalacha; A Palepu; M A Moskowitz Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1998-10-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Daniel M Blumenthal; Andrew R Olenski; Robert W Yeh; Doreen DeFaria Yeh; Amy Sarma; Ada C Stefanescu Schmidt; Malissa J Wood; Anupam B Jena Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Erica Clarke Whalen; Grace Xu; Iwona Cygankiewicz; Ljuba Bacharova; Wojciech Zareba; Jonathan S Steinberg; Larisa G Tereshchenko; Adrian Baranchuk Journal: Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 1.468
Authors: Pamela S Douglas; Anne K Rzeszut; C Noel Bairey Merz; Claire S Duvernoy; Sandra J Lewis; Mary Norine Walsh; Linda Gillam Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Sera Whitelaw; Lehana Thabane; Mamas A Mamas; Nosheen Reza; Khadijah Breathett; Pamela S Douglas; Harriette G C Van Spall Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Samuel B Brusca; Christopher Barnett; Brendan J Barnhart; Weifeng Weng; David A Morrow; Jeffrey S Soble; Jason N Katz; Brandon M Wiley; Sean van Diepen; Antonio D Gomez; Michael A Solomon Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-03-19 Impact factor: 5.501