Gender differences in academic productivity, educational positions, and leadership appointments of physicians in the U.S.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Promotions in academic medicine are frequently based on number of publications and leadership positions held. While prior study has established women publish less than men, many evaluations are limited to individual specialties and do not evaluate involvement with educational activities. OBJECTIVE: To compare gender differences in academic output, intramural leadership positions, and educational leadership positions of academic physicians. METHODS: The curriculum vitae and de-identified demographic data of all permanent physicians employed at a multi-site academic medical center were reviewed from April to May 2020. Multivariable logistic and Poisson regressions evaluated leadership positions and number of publications. RESULTS: Of 3,359 physicians in the demographic database, 32.3% (n = 1,087) were women and 72.5% were white (n = 2,510). Of the 3,015 physicians in the curriculum vitae database, 32% (n = 962) were women. Women were more likely (p < 0.001) to be assistant professor (54% vs. 42.7%) and less likely to be associate (18.1% vs. 20.3%) or full professor (14.6% vs. 29.1%). Women assistant professors published 22% fewer articles (ratio estimate = 0.78, p < 0.001), associate professors 18% less (coefficient = 0.82, p < 0.001), and full professors 23% less (coefficient = 0.77, p < 0.001). Fewer women were program directors for residencies (1.6% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.02) or fellowships (5.4% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.04), and held fewer division or department leadership positions (OR 0.8, 95% CI as [0.6, 1.0], p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Women physicians do not outperform men across any education, leadership, or publication category. A cultural shift is needed to redefine traditional metrics for leadership appointments if academic medicine hopes to achieve equity.