Virginia W Osborn1, Kaleigh Doke2, Kent A Griffith3, Rochelle Jones4, Anna Lee5, Genevieve Maquilan6, Adrianna Henson Masters7, Ashley A Albert8, Laura L Dover9, Lindsay L Puckett10, Courtney Hentz11, Jenna M Kahn12, Lauren E Colbert13, Parul N Barry14, Reshma Jagsi15. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Faculty Practice at Elmhurst Hospital Center, Elmhurst, New York. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, Kansas. 3. Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 4. Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Cancer Center at Cooley Dickinson Hospital, Northampton, Massachusetts. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 10. Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois. 12. Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia. 13. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 14. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois. 15. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: rjagsi@med.umich.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Women remain underrepresented at all levels within the field of radiation oncology. We sought to study current female residents' experiences and concerns to inform interventions to promote gender equity. Furthermore, we evaluated interest in a professional society specifically for women radiation oncologists. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous 76-item survey was designed and distributed to current women residents in radiation oncology in 2017-2018. Analyses describe personal, program, and family characteristics and experiences before and after joining the field. RESULTS: Of 170 female residents surveyed, 125 responded (74% response rate). Over one-quarter were in programs with ≤2 female residents (29%) and ≤2 female attendings (29%). One-third (34%) reported having children. Over half (51%) reported that lack of mentorship affected career ambitions. Over half (52%) agreed that gender-specific bias existed in their programs, and over a quarter (27%) reported they had experienced unwanted sexual comments, attention, or advances by a superior or colleague. Only 5% reported no symptoms of burnout. Almost all (95%) agreed that radiation oncology is perceived as family friendly; however, only 52% agreed that it actually is. An overwhelming majority (90%) expressed interest in joining a professional group for women in radiation oncology. CONCLUSIONS: In the first study to our knowledge to focus specifically on the experiences of women residents in radiation oncology, a number of areas for potential improvement were highlighted, including isolation and underrepresentation, mentorship needs, bias and harassment, and gender-based obstacles such as need for support during pregnancy and motherhood. These findings support the organization of groups such as the Society for Women in Radiation Oncology, which seeks to target these needs to promote gender equity.
PURPOSE:Women remain underrepresented at all levels within the field of radiation oncology. We sought to study current female residents' experiences and concerns to inform interventions to promote gender equity. Furthermore, we evaluated interest in a professional society specifically for women radiation oncologists. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous 76-item survey was designed and distributed to current women residents in radiation oncology in 2017-2018. Analyses describe personal, program, and family characteristics and experiences before and after joining the field. RESULTS: Of 170 female residents surveyed, 125 responded (74% response rate). Over one-quarter were in programs with ≤2 female residents (29%) and ≤2 female attendings (29%). One-third (34%) reported having children. Over half (51%) reported that lack of mentorship affected career ambitions. Over half (52%) agreed that gender-specific bias existed in their programs, and over a quarter (27%) reported they had experienced unwanted sexual comments, attention, or advances by a superior or colleague. Only 5% reported no symptoms of burnout. Almost all (95%) agreed that radiation oncology is perceived as family friendly; however, only 52% agreed that it actually is. An overwhelming majority (90%) expressed interest in joining a professional group for women in radiation oncology. CONCLUSIONS: In the first study to our knowledge to focus specifically on the experiences of women residents in radiation oncology, a number of areas for potential improvement were highlighted, including isolation and underrepresentation, mentorship needs, bias and harassment, and gender-based obstacles such as need for support during pregnancy and motherhood. These findings support the organization of groups such as the Society for Women in Radiation Oncology, which seeks to target these needs to promote gender equity.
Authors: Jessica M Schuster; Hina Saeed; Lindsay L Puckett; Jean M Moran; Krisha Howell; Charles Thomas; Shannon Offerman; Gita Suneja; Reshma Jagsi Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-03-09
Authors: Sondos Zayed; X Melody Qu; Andrew Warner; Tina Wanting Zhang; Joanna M Laba; George B Rodrigues; David A Palma Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-09-13
Authors: Giulia Fichera; Isolde Martina Busch; Michela Rimondini; Raffaella Motta; Chiara Giraudo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ishwaria M Subbiah; Merry Jennifer Markham; Stephanie L Graff; Laurie B Matt-Amaral; Julia L Close; Kent A Griffith; Reshma Jagsi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 44.544