TY - JOUR
T1 - Women in pediatrics
T2 - Progress, barriers, and opportunities for equity, diversity, and inclusion
AU - Spector, Nancy D.
AU - Asante, Philomena A.
AU - Marcelin, Jasmine R.
AU - Poorman, Julie A.
AU - Larson, Allison R.
AU - Salles, Arghavan
AU - Oxentenko, Amy S.
AU - Silver, Julie K.
N1 - Funding Information:
Gatekeepers: (1) academic medical centers, hospitals, health care organizations and practices; (2) medical societies; (3) journals; and (4) public and private funding agencies and foundations (eg, the NIH, including the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) Gatekeeper: NIH
Funding Information:
AAMC: Association of American Medical Colleges AAP: American Academy of Pediatrics ELAM: Hedwig van Ameringen Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine FOPO: Federation of Pediatric Organizations NIH: National Institutes of Health
Funding Information:
academic publishing could be lower research productivity, and so it is important to assess the role of gender bias in grant funding. Although men and women physicians were found to be equally likely to receive mentored K awards,79 several studies have shown that critiques written for NIH Research Project R01 Grant applications from men and women appear to be written differently.80–82 For example, critiques of women’s funded grant applications tended to have more references to competence or ability, whereas men’s tended to have more negative terminology,81 suggesting women’s grant applications might need to be of higher quality to receive a fundable score. Similarly, male investigators were more likely to be described as leaders and pioneers, whereas female investigators were more likely to have their success attributed to their environment.82 Numerical scores assigned to women’s grants were also worse than those assigned to men’s.80,82 Even when women had successful grant applications, they were awarded less money than men were.83 However, when applications to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research were assessed by the quality of the science rather than characteristics of the investigator, the funding gap between men and women decreased.84,85
Funding Information:
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Dr Marcelin gives professional talks such as grand rounds, diversity and inclusion workshops, and medical conference lectures and receives honoraria from conference or workshop organizers. Dr Silver has personally funded the Be Ethical Campaign, and proceeds from the campaign support disparities research. As an academic physician, Dr Silver has published books and receives royalties from book publishers, and she gives professional talks such as grand rounds and medical conference plenary lectures and receives honoraria from conference organizers. Dr Silver has grant funding from (1) The Arnold P. Gold Foundation (physician and patient care disparities research) and (2) the United States–Israel Binational Scientific Foundation (culinary telemedicine research); the other authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - Gender bias and discrimination have profound and far-reaching effects on the health care workforce, delivery of patient care, and advancement of science and are antithetical to the principles of professionalism. In the quest for gender equity, medicine, with its abundance of highly educated and qualified women, should be leading the way. The sheer number of women who comprise the majority of pediatricians in the United States suggests this specialty has a unique opportunity to stand out as progressively equitable. Indeed, there has been much progress to celebrate for women in medicine and pediatrics. However, many challenges remain, and there are areas in which progress is too slow, stalled, or even regressing. The fair treatment of women pediatricians will require enhanced and simultaneous commitment from leaders in 4 key gatekeeper groups: Academic medical centers, hospitals, health care organizations, and practices; medical societies; journals; and funding agencies. In this report, we describe the 6-step equity, diversity, and inclusion cycle, which provides a strategic methodology to (1) examine equity, diversity, and inclusion data; (2) share results with stakeholders; (3) investigate causality; (4) implement strategic interventions; (5) track outcomes and adjust strategies; and (6) disseminate results. Next steps include the enforcement of a climate of transparency and accountability, with leaders prioritizing and financially supporting workforce gender equity. This scientific and data-driven approach will accelerate progress and help pave a pathway to better health care and science.
AB - Gender bias and discrimination have profound and far-reaching effects on the health care workforce, delivery of patient care, and advancement of science and are antithetical to the principles of professionalism. In the quest for gender equity, medicine, with its abundance of highly educated and qualified women, should be leading the way. The sheer number of women who comprise the majority of pediatricians in the United States suggests this specialty has a unique opportunity to stand out as progressively equitable. Indeed, there has been much progress to celebrate for women in medicine and pediatrics. However, many challenges remain, and there are areas in which progress is too slow, stalled, or even regressing. The fair treatment of women pediatricians will require enhanced and simultaneous commitment from leaders in 4 key gatekeeper groups: Academic medical centers, hospitals, health care organizations, and practices; medical societies; journals; and funding agencies. In this report, we describe the 6-step equity, diversity, and inclusion cycle, which provides a strategic methodology to (1) examine equity, diversity, and inclusion data; (2) share results with stakeholders; (3) investigate causality; (4) implement strategic interventions; (5) track outcomes and adjust strategies; and (6) disseminate results. Next steps include the enforcement of a climate of transparency and accountability, with leaders prioritizing and financially supporting workforce gender equity. This scientific and data-driven approach will accelerate progress and help pave a pathway to better health care and science.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074445821&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074445821&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1542/peds.2019-2149
DO - 10.1542/peds.2019-2149
M3 - Article
C2 - 31548337
AN - SCOPUS:85074445821
SN - 0031-4005
VL - 144
JO - Pediatrics
JF - Pediatrics
IS - 5
M1 - e20192149
ER -