MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003496354 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20190090

Gender and academic promotion of Canadian general surgeons: a cross-sectional study

2020· article· en· W3003496354 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusCross-sectional studyPromotion (chess)Logistic regressionMedicineFamily medicineGraduate medical educationDemographyMedical educationGerontologyMEDLINEAccreditationInternal medicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Gender disparities in faculty rank have yet to be studied among Canadian physicians. The purpose of this study was to determine whether differences in region, training, research productivity and years in practice explain gender differences in academic promotion among Canadian general surgeons. <h3>Methods:</h3> We developed a cross-sectional database of faculty-appointed general surgeons practising in the hospitals affiliated with the 17 universities within the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada in 2017 using publicly available directories, university and hospital websites, and direct communication. The data were collected between October and December 2018 and included gender, residency completion year, graduate education, fellowships, number of publications and Scopus h-index; faculty lists and professorship status were verified by program administrators or division heads of their respective divisions. The dependent variable was binary: full professor or not. A combined outcome of associate or full professor was also analyzed. We analyzed all variables in a multivariable logistic regression model. <h3>Results:</h3> Of the 17 institutions contacted, all but 1 confirmed the faculty lists and professorship status. A total of 405 surgeons were included, of whom 111 (27.4%) were women. Sixty-eight women (61.3%) and 120 men (40.8%) were assistant professors, and 9 women (8.1%) and 75 men (25.5%) were full professors. Although on average women had completed residency more recently than men (15.2 yr v. 19.2 yr, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), there was no difference between men and women in the mean number of publications as residents (2.98 v. 2.74, <i>p</i> = 0.7) or per year of practice (3.12 v. 2.09, <i>p</i> = 0.2), number of fellowships pursued (<i>p</i> = 0.7) or graduate education (<i>p</i> = 0.2). In the multivariable model (C-statistic = 0.88), gender remained significantly associated with full professorship (odds ratio 2.79, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 6.92), along with years in practice (odds ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 2.30). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> After controlling for years in practice, training and research productivity measures, we found that female surgeons with faculty appointments in Canada were less likely than their male counterparts to receive promotion to full professor. Pervasive inequities in systems of promotion must be addressed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.209
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it