Phyllis L Carr1, Christine Gunn2, Anita Raj3, Samantha Kaplan4, Karen M Freund5. 1. Massachusetts General Hospital, Women's Health, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: pcarr1@partners.org. 2. Boston University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Women's Health Unit, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 4. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Greater numbers of women in medicine have not resulted in more women achieving senior positions. Programs supporting the recruitment, promotion, and retention of women in academic medicine could help to achieve greater advancement of more women to leadership positions. Qualitative research was conducted to understand such programs at 23 institutions and, using the social ecological model, examine how they operate at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, academic community, and policy levels. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with faculty representatives (n = 44) of the Group on Women in Medicine and Science, Diversity and Inclusion, or senior leaders with knowledge on gender climate in 24 medical schools. Four trained interviewers conducted semistructured interviews that addressed faculty perceptions of gender equity and advancement, which were audiotaped and transcribed. The data were categorized into three content areas-recruitment, promotion, and retention-and coded a priori for each area based on their social ecological level of operation. FINDINGS: Participants from nearly 40% of the institutions reported no special programs for recruiting, promoting, or retaining women, largely describing such programming as unnecessary. Existing programs primarily targeted the individual and interpersonal levels simultaneously, via training, mentoring, and networking, or the institutional level, via search committee trainings, child and elder care, and spousal hiring programs. Lesser effort at the academic community and policy levels were described. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that many U.S. medical schools have no programs supporting gender equity among medical faculty. Existing programs primarily target the individual or interpersonal level of the social ecological interaction. The academic community and broader policy environment require greater focus as levels with little attention to advancing women's careers. Universal multilevel efforts are needed to more effectively advance the careers of medical women faculty and support gender equity.
OBJECTIVE: Greater numbers of women in medicine have not resulted in more women achieving senior positions. Programs supporting the recruitment, promotion, and retention of women in academic medicine could help to achieve greater advancement of more women to leadership positions. Qualitative research was conducted to understand such programs at 23 institutions and, using the social ecological model, examine how they operate at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, academic community, and policy levels. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with faculty representatives (n = 44) of the Group on Women in Medicine and Science, Diversity and Inclusion, or senior leaders with knowledge on gender climate in 24 medical schools. Four trained interviewers conducted semistructured interviews that addressed faculty perceptions of gender equity and advancement, which were audiotaped and transcribed. The data were categorized into three content areas-recruitment, promotion, and retention-and coded a priori for each area based on their social ecological level of operation. FINDINGS:Participants from nearly 40% of the institutions reported no special programs for recruiting, promoting, or retaining women, largely describing such programming as unnecessary. Existing programs primarily targeted the individual and interpersonal levels simultaneously, via training, mentoring, and networking, or the institutional level, via search committee trainings, child and elder care, and spousal hiring programs. Lesser effort at the academic community and policy levels were described. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that many U.S. medical schools have no programs supporting gender equity among medical faculty. Existing programs primarily target the individual or interpersonal level of the social ecological interaction. The academic community and broader policy environment require greater focus as levels with little attention to advancing women's careers. Universal multilevel efforts are needed to more effectively advance the careers of medical women faculty and support gender equity.
Authors: Melinda J Morton; Mirar B Bristol; Peter H Atherton; C William Schwab; Seema S Sonnad Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2008-04-24 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Sharon A Dannels; Hisashi Yamagata; Sharon A McDade; Yu-Chuan Chuang; Katharine A Gleason; Jean M McLaughlin; Rosalyn C Richman; Page S Morahan Journal: Acad Med Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 6.893
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: Lindsay E Kuo; Heather G Lyu; Molly P Jarman; Nelya Melnitchouk; Gerard M Doherty; Douglas S Smink; Nancy L Cho Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Phyllis L Carr; Deborah Helitzer; Karen Freund; Alyssa Westring; Richard McGee; Patricia B Campbell; Christine V Wood; Amparo Villablanca Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-07-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Courtney E Harris; Stephanie D Clark; Sherry S Chesak; Tejinder K Khalsa; Manisha Salinas; Amy C S Pearson; Amy W Williams; Susan M Moeschler; Anjali Bhagra Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-04-30