C Rosso1, A Leger2, O Steichen3. 1. Inserm U 1127, CNRS UMR 7225, Sorbonne université, Institut du cerveau et de la moelle épinière, ICM, 75013 Paris, France; Urgences cérébro-vasculaires, hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France. Electronic address: charlotte.rosso@aphp.fr. 2. Urgences cérébro-vasculaires, hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, AP-HP, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France. 3. Service de médecine interne, hôpital Tenon, AP-HP, 75020 Paris, France; Inserm, Sorbonne université, université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, laboratoire d'informatique médicale et ingénierie des connaissances en eSanté (LIMICS), 75006 Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether career development in academic medicine is more difficult for women than for men, and, if any, the nature and level of barriers to this progression. METHODS: Extraction of full-time medical staff in a Parisian hospital group, through the SIGAPS platform; an online questionnaire survey of career choices and barriers experienced by full-time male and female physicians. The study population comprises 181 hospital practitioners and 141 academic physicians (49 associate professors and 92 full professors). RESULTS: Women represent 49% of the medical staff but 15% of full professors. This underrepresentation of women is more important among intensivists/anesthesiologists than technique-based specialists (such as radiologists, biologists…). There is no difference in scientific output, marital status and parenthood between women and men. On the other hand, there is a difference in attitudes highlighted by the EVAR risk-taking scale as well as in the burden of familial involvement and the prejudices felt by women during the academic selection process. CONCLUSION: The glass ceiling exists in one of the largest French hospital group. Career development principles promote merit, but should decrease the benefit of "masculine" attitudes in the competition for academic positions. Academic selection criteria should evolve to limit the disadvantage of women related to deeper familial involvement and less competitive strategies and risk-taking attitudes.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether career development in academic medicine is more difficult for women than for men, and, if any, the nature and level of barriers to this progression. METHODS: Extraction of full-time medical staff in a Parisian hospital group, through the SIGAPS platform; an online questionnaire survey of career choices and barriers experienced by full-time male and female physicians. The study population comprises 181 hospital practitioners and 141 academic physicians (49 associate professors and 92 full professors). RESULTS:Women represent 49% of the medical staff but 15% of full professors. This underrepresentation of women is more important among intensivists/anesthesiologists than technique-based specialists (such as radiologists, biologists…). There is no difference in scientific output, marital status and parenthood between women and men. On the other hand, there is a difference in attitudes highlighted by the EVAR risk-taking scale as well as in the burden of familial involvement and the prejudices felt by women during the academic selection process. CONCLUSION: The glass ceiling exists in one of the largest French hospital group. Career development principles promote merit, but should decrease the benefit of "masculine" attitudes in the competition for academic positions. Academic selection criteria should evolve to limit the disadvantage of women related to deeper familial involvement and less competitive strategies and risk-taking attitudes.
Keywords:
Career mobility; Corps enseignant et administratif en médecine; Facteurs sexuels; Faculty; Femmes médecins; Femmes qui travaillent; Medical; Mobilité de carrière; Sex factors; Women physicians; Working women
Authors: A Cathelain; M Jourdain; C Cordonnier; S Catteau-Jonard; D Sebbane; M C Copin; L Berlingo; C Rubod; C Garabedian Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 2.463