Dataset Information

Breaking the Gender Gap: A Two-part Observational Study of the Gender Disparity Among Korean Academic Emergency Physicians.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Despite greater access to training positions and the presence of more women in emergency medicine, it has remained a men-dominated field. This study aims to identify the key issues causing the gender gap in Korea and establish measures to overcome them. METHODS:Using the annual statistical reports of the National Emergency Medical Center and data published on the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine website, cases that listed the current status and positions of members in its organization and its committees were analyzed. Secondary analysis was conducted using data from the 2015 Korean Society of Emergency Survey that included physicians' demographics, academic ranking, years of experience, clinical work hours, training and board certification, core faculty status, position, and salaries. RESULTS:As of September 2019, women account for only 12.7% of the total number of emergency physicians (EP) in Korea; of 119 chair/ vice-chair academic positions, women represented only 9.2%. Women EP were more often assistant professors and fellowship-trained, with fewer in core faculty. However, they worked the same numbers of clinical hours as their men counterparts. The median annual salary of women EP was less than that of men EP after adjusting for academic hospital rank, clinical hours, and core faculty status. CONCLUSIONS:A gender gap still exists among Korean EP, and women earn less than men regardless of their rank, clinical hours, or training. Future studies should evaluate more data and develop system-wide practices to eliminate gender disparities.

SUBMITTER: Lee MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7569010 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Breaking the Gender Gap: A Two-part Observational Study of the Gender Disparity Among Korean Academic Emergency Physicians.

Lee Mi Jin MJ Kim ChangHo C

Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi 20200807 5

<h4>Objectives</h4>Despite greater access to training positions and the presence of more women in emergency medicine, it has remained a men-dominated field. This study aims to identify the key issues causing the gender gap in Korea and establish measures to overcome them.<h4>Methods</h4>Using the annual statistical reports of the National Emergency Medical Center and data published on the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine website, cases that listed the current status and positions of members ...[more]

PMID: 33070508

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many species employ camouflage to disguise their true shape and avoid detection or recognition. Disruptive coloration is a form of camouflage in which high-contrast patterns obscure internal features or break up an animal's outline. In particular, edge enhancement creates illusory, or 'fake' depth edges within the animal's body. Disruptive coloration often co-occurs with background matching, and together, these strategies make it difficult for an observer to visually segment an animal from its background. However, stereoscopic vision could provide a critical advantage in the arms race between perception and camouflage: the depth information provided by binocular disparities reveals the true three-dimensional layout of a scene, and might, therefore, help an observer to overcome the effects of disruptive coloration. Human observers located snake targets embedded in leafy backgrounds. We analysed performance (response time) as a function of edge enhancement, illumination conditions and the availability of binocular depth cues. We confirm that edge enhancement contributes to effective camouflage: observers were slower to find snakes whose patterning contains 'fake' depth edges. Importantly, however, this effect disappeared when binocular depth cues were available. Illumination also affected detection: under directional illumination, where both the leaves and snake produced strong cast shadows, snake targets were localized more quickly than in scenes rendered under ambient illumination. In summary, we show that illusory depth edges, created via disruptive coloration, help to conceal targets from human observers. However, cast shadows and binocular depth information improve detection by providing information about the true three-dimensional structure of a scene. Importantly, the strong interaction between disparity and edge enhancement suggests that stereoscopic vision has a critical role in breaking camouflage, enabling the observer to overcome the disruptive effects of edge enhancement.

Project description:ObjectiveMany studies have analysed gender bias in academic medicine; however, no comprehensive synthesis of the literature has been performed. We conducted a pooled analysis of the difference in the proportion of men versus women with full professorship among academic physicians.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Education Resources Information Center and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 3 July 2020.Study selectionAll original studies reporting faculty rank stratified by gender worldwide were included.Data extraction and synthesisStudy screening, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models.ResultsOur search yielded 5897 articles. 218 studies were included with 991 207 academic physician data points. Men were 2.77 times more likely to be full professors (182 271/643 790 men vs 30 349/251 501 women, OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.57 to 2.98). Although men practised for longer (median 18 vs 12 years, p<0.00002), the gender gap remained after pooling seven studies that adjusted for factors including time in practice, specialty, publications, h-index, additional PhD and institution (adjusted OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.20). Meta-regression by data collection year demonstrated improvement over time (p=0.0011); however, subgroup analysis showed that gender disparities remain significant in the 2010-2020 decade (OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.48 to 2.80). The gender gap was present across all specialties and both within and outside of North America. Men published more papers (mean difference 17.2, 95% CI 14.7 to 19.7), earned higher salaries (mean difference $33 256, 95% CI $25 969 to $40 542) and were more likely to be departmental chairs (OR 2.61, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.12).ConclusionsGender inequity in academic medicine exists across all specialties, geographical regions and multiple measures of success, including academic rank, publications, salary and leadership. Men are more likely than women to be full professors after controlling for experience, academic productivity and specialty. Although there has been some improvement over time, the gender disparity in faculty rank persists.Prospero registration numberCRD42020197414.

Project description:BackgroundThe physician gender wage gap may be due, in part, to productivity-based compensation models that undervalue female practice patterns.ObjectiveTo determine how primary care physician (PCP) compensation by gender differs when applying existing productivity-based and alternative compensation models.DesignMicrosimulation.Setting2016 to 2019 national clinical registry of 1222 primary care practices.ParticipantsMale and female PCPs matched on specialty, years since medical school graduation, practice site, and sessions worked.MeasurementsNet annual, full-time-equivalent compensation for male versus female PCPs, under productivity-based fee-for-service, panel size-based capitation without or with risk adjustment, and hybrid payment models. Microsimulation inputs included patient and visit characteristics and overhead expenses.ResultsAmong 1435 matched male (n = 881) and female (n = 554) PCPs, female PCP panels included patients who were, on average, younger, had lower diagnosis-based risk scores, were more often female, and were more often uninsured or insured by Medicaid rather than by Medicare. Under productivity-based payment, female PCPs earned a median of $58 829 (interquartile range [IQR], $39 553 to $120 353; 21%) less than male PCPs. This gap was similar under capitation ($58 723 [IQR, $42 141 to $140 192]). It was larger under capitation risk-adjusted for age alone ($74 695 [IQR, $42 884 to $152 423]), for diagnosis-based scores alone ($114 792 [IQR, $49 080 to $215 326] and $89 974 [IQR, $26 175 to $173 760]), and for age-, sex-, and diagnosis-based scores ($83 438 [IQR, $28 927 to $129 414] and $66 195 [IQR, $11 899 to $96 566]). The gap was smaller and nonsignificant under capitation risk-adjusted for age and sex ($36 631 [IQR, $12 743 to $73 898]).LimitationPanel attribution based on office visits.ConclusionThe gender wage gap varied by compensation model, with capitation risk-adjusted for patient age and sex resulting in a smaller gap. Future models might better align with primary care effort and outcomes.Primary funding sourceNone.

Project description:BackgroundGender imbalances in academia have been evident historically and persist today. For the past 60 years, we have witnessed the increase of participation of women in biomedical disciplines, showing that the gender gap is shrinking. However, preliminary evidence suggests that women, including female researchers, are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of unequal distribution of childcare, elderly care, and other kinds of domestic and emotional labor. Sudden lockdowns and abrupt shifts in daily routines have had disproportionate consequences on their productivity, which is reflected by a sudden drop in research output in biomedical research, consequently affecting the number of female authors of scientific publications.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate adverse effect on the productivity of female researchers in the biomedical field in terms of authorship of scientific publications.MethodsThis is a retrospective observational bibliometric study. We investigated the proportion of male and female researchers who published scientific papers during the COVID-19 pandemic, using bibliometric data from biomedical preprint servers and selected Springer-Nature journals. We used the ordinary least squares regression model to estimate the expected proportions over time by correcting for temporal trends. We also used a set of statistical methods, such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and regression discontinuity design, to test the validity of the results.ResultsA total of 78,950 papers from the bioRxiv and medRxiv repositories and from 62 selected Springer-Nature journals by 346,354 unique authors were analyzed. The acquired data set consisted of papers that were published between January 1, 2019, and August 2, 2020. The proportion of female first authors publishing in the biomedical field during the pandemic dropped by 9.1%, on average, across disciplines (expected arithmetic mean yest=0.39; observed arithmetic mean y=0.35; standard error of the estimate, Sest=0.007; standard error of the observation, σx=0.004). The impact was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19 research, where the proportion of female scientists in the first author position dropped by 28% (yest=0.39; y=0.28; Sest=0.007; σx=0.007). When looking at the last authors, the proportion of women dropped by 7.9%, on average (yest=0.25; y=0.23; Sest=0.005; σx=0.003), while the proportion of women writing about COVID-19 as the last author decreased by 18.8% (yest=0.25; y=0.21; Sest=0.005; σx=0.007). Further, by geocoding authors' affiliations, we showed that the gender disparities became even more apparent when disaggregated by country, up to 35% in some cases.ConclusionsOur findings document a decrease in the number of publications by female authors in the biomedical field during the global pandemic. This effect was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19, indicating that women are producing fewer publications related to COVID-19 research. This sudden increase in the gender gap was persistent across the 10 countries with the highest number of researchers. These results should be used to inform the scientific community of this worrying trend in COVID-19 research and the disproportionate effect that the pandemic has had on female academics.

Dataset Information

Breaking the Gender Gap: A Two-part Observational Study of the Gender Disparity Among Korean Academic Emergency Physicians.

Publications

Breaking the Gender Gap: A Two-part Observational Study of the Gender Disparity Among Korean Academic Emergency Physicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets