Published in:
01-06-2020 | Original Research
Gender Issues in Academic Hospital Medicine: a National Survey of Hospitalist Leaders
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 6/2020
Login to get accessAbstract
Background
Gender inequities are documented in academic medicine. Within General Internal Medicine (GIM), there are fewer female division directors and first and last authors on publications. With gender parity in US medical school graduates and with Academic Hospital (AH) medicine being a relatively newer discipline, one might postulate that AH would have less gender inequity.
Design
A national survey of AH programs was developed via literature review and expert recommendations. Domains included program and faculty information. Gender of the leader was determined via website or telephone call.
Participants
Leaders of AH programs associated with the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). Programs without a primary teaching hospital or hospitalist program and those not staffed by university-affiliated physicians were excluded.
Main Measures
Description and characteristics of leaders and programs including a multivariable analysis of gender of hospitalist leaders and the portion of female faculty.
Key Results
59% response rate (80 of 135); there were no differences between responders/non-responders in NIH funding (p = 0.12), type of institution (p = 0.09), geographic region (p = 0.15), or year established (p = 0.86). Reported number of female and male faculty were approximately equal. 80% of hospitalist leaders were male; 37% of male hospitalist leaders were professors, no female leaders were professors. In univariate and multivariate analysis only the number of hospitals staffed was a significant predictor of having a female hospitalist leader. There were no significant predictors of having fewer female faculty.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated gender inequality in academic hospital medicine regarding leadership and rank. Though there was equal gender distribution of faculty, among leaders most were men and all “full professors” were men. As diversity benefits the tripartite mission research on methods, initiatives and programs that achieve gender equity in leadership are needed.