Gender, Race, and Ethnicity of US Academic Ophthalmology Faculty and Department Chairs From 1966 to 2021
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Workforce diversity is integral to optimal function within health care teams. Objective: To analyze gender, race, and ethnicity trends in rank and leadership among US full-time academic ophthalmology faculty and department chairs between 1966 and 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included full-time US academic ophthalmology faculty and department chairs registered in the Association of American Medical Colleges. Study data were analyzed in September 2023. Exposure: Identifying with an underrepresented in medicine (URiM) group. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome measures were demographic (ie, gender, race, and ethnicity) changes among academic faculty and department chairs, assessed in 5-year intervals. The term minoritized race refers to any racial group other than White race. Results: There were 221 academic physicians in 1966 (27 women [12.2%]; 38 minoritized race [17.2%]; 8 Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish [3.6%]) and 3158 academic faculty by 2021 (1320 women [41.8%]; 1298 minoritized race [41.1%]; 147 Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish ethnicity [4.7%]). The annual proportional change for women, minoritized race, and Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish ethnicity was +0.63% per year (95% CI, 0.53%-0.72%), +0.54% per year (95% CI, 0.72%-0.36%), and -0.01% (95% CI, -0.03% to 0%), respectively. Women were underrepresented across academic ranks and increasingly so at higher echelons, ranging from nonprofessor/instructor roles (period-averaged mean difference [PA-MD], 19.88%; 95% CI, 16.82%-22.94%) to professor (PA-MD, 81.33%; 95% CI, 78.80%-83.86%). The corpus of department chairs grew from 77 in 1977 (0 women; 7 minoritized race [9.09%]; 2 Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish ethnicity [2.60%]) to 104 by 2021 (17 women [16.35%]; 22 minoritized race [21.15%]; 4 Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish ethnicity [3.85%]). For department chairs, the annual rate of change in the proportion of women, minoritized race, and Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish ethnicity was +0.32% per year (95% CI, 0.20%-0.44%), +0.34% per year (95% CI, 0.19%-0.49%), and +0.05% per year (95% CI, 0.02%-0.08%), respectively. In both faculty and department chairs, the proportion of URiM groups (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander) grew the least. Intersectionality analysis suggested that men and non-URiM status were associated with greater representation across ophthalmology faculty and department chairs. However, among ophthalmology faculty, URiM women and men did not significantly differ across strata of academic ranks, whereas for department chairs, no difference was observed in representation between URiM men and non-URiM women. Conclusion & Relevance: Results of this cohort study revealed that since 1966, workforce diversity progressed slowly and was limited to lower academic ranks and leadership positions. Intersectionality of URiM status and gender persisted in representation trends. These findings suggest further advocacy and intervention are needed to increase workforce diversity.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».