Women’s Representation Among Members and Leaders of National Medical Specialty Societies

Abstract

Purpose National medical specialty societies speak for their respective fields in policy debates, influence research, affect trainees’ specialization decisions, provide career development opportunities, and confer awards and recognitions. This study provides a comprehensive overview of the gender demographics of society members and leaders. Method In 2016, the Group on Women in Medicine and Science (of the Association of American Medical Colleges) sought to characterize the gender of members and leaders of specialty societies from 2000 to 2015. This report provides descriptive data, including how many of the responding societies (representing each of 30 major medical specialties) had substantial (> 10%) increases in women’s representation among leadership between the first and second halves of the study period. Results The average proportion of full members who were female in responding societies was 25.4% in 2005 and 29.3% in 2015. The proportion of women among those serving as the highest-ranking elected leader between 2000 and 2015 in each specialty ranged from 0% to 37.5% (mean, 15.8%). The mean proportion of women on governing boards ranged from 0% to 37.3% (mean of means, 18.8%) in 2000–2007 and from 0% to 47.6% (mean of means, 25.2%) in 2008–2015. In 9 specialties, the mean percentage of women serving on governing boards increased by over 10% from the first to the second half of the study period. Conclusions Although many women are full members of specialty societies, women still constitute a minority of leaders. This report establishes a baseline from which to evaluate the effect of societies’ efforts to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Analysis of Social Policy and the Effect of Career Advancement Support Programs for Female Doctors

“…In addition, it is essential to monitor the inclusion of women in professional societies, because leaders of professional societies tend to have a significant influence on scholarly inquiry and research in their respective fields. 48 However, alongside the implementation of these measures and programs that have proven to be effective in studies conducted outside Japan, it is necessary also to recognize and deliberately correct deep-rooted and continuous gender discrimination that arises from conscious or unconscious bias. 44 Accordingly, support for building female doctors' careers should not remain limited to childcare support.…”

Leadership Development in Ophthalmology: Current Impact and Future Needs

“…Publications that were included in the final qualitative analysis are described in Supplementary Table S1. [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] Discussion Ophthalmology-specific LDPs are similar to current LDPs at academic health centers 2 in size, structure, and lack of robust performance metric reporting. The first generation, Global LDP, represented a critical expansion of the AAO's leadership development training internationally.…”

A historic event: The first female officer of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery

“…Although women make up greater than 50% of medical school graduates, and increasing numbers of surgical residents (40%) and cardiothoracic surgery fellows (20%), women have constituted a minority of leaders in surgical societies. [1][2][3] Women comprise a minority of cardiothoracic surgeons, 8.4% (6.2% adult cardiac, 10.6% congenital, and 12.6% general thoracic), according to the recent Society of Thoracic Surgeons Practice and Access Task Force Report, 4 and women similarly represent a minority of cardiothoracic surgeons at top-ranked US institutions (7.3% overall, 5.1% cardiac, and 12.7% of thoracic). 5 In 2011, only the 200th woman earned board certification by the American Board of Thoracic Surgery, 62 years after the first board examination in 1949.…”