Dissecting disparity: improvements towards gender parity in leadership and on the podium within the Canadian Orthopaedic Association
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ObjectivesThe purpose of this paper was to analyse the 15-year trend of women in leadership roles within the Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA). This included not only leadership positions at the committee level in the association but also the more visible podium positions in the annual meeting programme: research podium and poster presentations, session moderators, panellists and faculty.MethodsData on the numbers of male and female members were gathered from COA membership records for the most recent 5 years (2014–2018), as well as for 10 years previous (2009) and 15 years previous (2004). Male and female representation on COA committees, as well as the number of presenters at the annual meeting was calculated. Descriptive data were generated to compare the changes in gender representation over time.ResultsIn Canada, in 2018, 11.2% of orthopaedic surgeons were female. Within the COA, 17.6% of the members are female, with active female surgeons comprising 11.6% of the total membership. The largest increase in representation of women within the COA is in the trainee category which is 25.3% female. At the 2018 annual meeting, 25% of the attendees were women, with 22% of all podium appearances by women. Not including research presentations, women participated as faculty in 11% of the appearances at the 2018 annual meeting.ConclusionIn conclusion, gender parity is not yet a reality in Canadian orthopaedics; however, the number of females in leadership roles and on the podium is consistent with the current gender diversity within the COA membership. Further efforts will be required to improve gender diversity as well as to encourage female medical students to consider orthopaedics as a specialty. The availability of female role models that are visible on the podium and in leadership positions may be one strategy to encourage the journey toward gender parity. The purpose of this paper was to analyse the 15-year trend of women in leadership roles within the Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA). This included not only leadership positions at the committee level in the association but also the more visible podium positions in the annual meeting programme: research podium and poster presentations, session moderators, panellists and faculty. Data on the numbers of male and female members were gathered from COA membership records for the most recent 5 years (2014–2018), as well as for 10 years previous (2009) and 15 years previous (2004). Male and female representation on COA committees, as well as the number of presenters at the annual meeting was calculated. Descriptive data were generated to compare the changes in gender representation over time. In Canada, in 2018, 11.2% of orthopaedic surgeons were female. Within the COA, 17.6% of the members are female, with active female surgeons comprising 11.6% of the total membership. The largest increase in representation of women within the COA is in the trainee category which is 25.3% female. At the 2018 annual meeting, 25% of the attendees were women, with 22% of all podium appearances by women. Not including research presentations, women participated as faculty in 11% of the appearances at the 2018 annual meeting. In conclusion, gender parity is not yet a reality in Canadian orthopaedics; however, the number of females in leadership roles and on the podium is consistent with the current gender diversity within the COA membership. Further efforts will be required to improve gender diversity as well as to encourage female medical students to consider orthopaedics as a specialty. The availability of female role models that are visible on the podium and in leadership positions may be one strategy to encourage the journey toward gender parity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».