A Report on the Representation of Women in Academic Plastic Surgery Leadership

Abstract

Background: The year 2017 marked the first year women comprised a majority of U.S. medical school matriculants. While more women are pursuing surgical training, within plastic surgery, there is a steady attrition of women advancing in leadership roles. The authors report the current status of women in academic plastic surgery, from trainees to chairwomen and national leadership positions. Methods: The Electronic Residency Applications Service, San Francisco Match, National Resident Matching Program, Association of American Medical Colleges, American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons, Plastic Surgery Education Network, and professional websites for journals and national societies were accessed for demographic information from 2007 to 2017. Results: The number of female integrated pathway applicants remained stable (30 percent), with an increased proportion of female residents from 30 percent to 40 percent. There was an increase in female faculty members from 14.6 percent to 22.0 percent, an increase of less than 1 percent per year. Twelve percent of program directors and 8.7 percent of department heads were women. Nationally, major professional societies and administrative boards demonstrated a proportion of female members ranging from 19 percent to 55 percent (average, 27.7 percent). The proportion of female committee leaders ranged from 0 percent to 50 percent (average, 21.5 percent). Only six societies have had female presidents. No major journal had had a female editor-in-chief. The proportion of female editorial board members ranged from 1 percent to 33 percent (average, 16.1 percent). Conclusions: The authors’ study shows a leak in the pipeline at all levels, from trainees to faculty to leadership on the national stage. This report serves as a starting point for investigating reasons for the underrepresentation of talented women in plastic surgery leadership.

Female Representation and Academic Leadership in Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

“…Studies have demonstrated disparity in female leadership and authorship in the field of general plastic surgery, and although the number of women entering the field is increasing, female authors lag behind those of other specialties and are scarce on editorial boards. [23][24][25][26][27] Although not directly queried in this cross-sectional analysis, etiologies for gender inequity in medicine and other fields include implicit biases, cultural attitudes, gender stereotyping, sexual harassment, work-life balance, career goals and satisfaction, and lack of female mentors. [28][29][30] Recognizing the gender differences in FPRS, we hope to inspire future strategies to overcome barriers to inequity.…”

Testing for Implicit Gender Bias among Plastic Surgeons

“… 6 – 8 Women are underrepresented on the podium at plastic surgery educational meetings and are less likely to be considered in selection for prestigious awards. 9 , 10 However, women are not less career-oriented than men: a study of 149,000 adults in 142 countries carried out by the International Labor Organization found that 70% of women would prefer to be working in paid jobs, rather than caring for their families, or doing both. 11…”

The experiences of female surgeons around the world: a scoping review

“…[ 87 ] High income United States Retrospective review n = 123 Not reported 2020 A Report on the Representation of Women in Academic Plastic Surgery Leadership. [ 88 ] High income United States Retrospective review Not reported 2020 Gender and academic promotion of Canadian general surgeons: a cross-sectional study. [ 89 ] High income Canada Cross-sectional analysis n = 405 (111/294) 27% Not reported 2020 Gender Disparities Among Burn Surgery Leadership.…”