Diversity Among American Dermatological Association Members by Sex and Geographic Region (Preprint)

Abstract

BACKGROUND Professional associations offer important opportunities for networking, research collaboration, and career advancement. Given the importance of membership, our group evaluated membership diversity within one of the first dermatologic societies in The United States. Membership acquisition occurs through an invitation-only basis without formal criteria available. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to identify if there are differences in member representation within sex and geographic distribution of The American Dermatological Society. METHODS On February 2023 the ADA directory identified 767 members. Independent reviewers (2) recorded member names, self-identified sex, city, and state listed on their national practitioner identifier (NPI) and those who were deceased; a third reviewer resolved data conflicts. Sex was identified on NPI databases. Data was omitted for retired, deceased, or unidentified members. The “R” software performed the statistical analysis and the package “usmap” created figures. Data was publicly available, de-identified, and did not require IRB review. RESULTS ADA members (691) were 32.85% female and 67.15% male. Members practiced in the United States (84.08%) and internationally (15.92%); international members were 25.23% female and 74.77% male. Two states among 41 represented had a similar number male and female members. (Figure 1.) The top 5 states represented 42.51% of members; California had 13.60% followed by New York (10.33%), Massachusetts (6.54%), Pennsylvania (6.37%), and Florida (5.68%). CONCLUSIONS Improving gender, sex, racial, ethnic, and geographic diversity is a recognized marker of excellence by dermatologic societies1 and the ADA must recognize, discuss, and develop solutions to improve representation among its members. Membership was most common among urban centers with 5 states comprising almost half of membership. Ethnic/racial minority status is not expected to be significant due to the underlying ethnic/racial underrepresentation in dermatology as a specialty.