A94 BARRIERS TO ADVANCEMENT ALONG THE GASTROENTEROLOGY CAREER PATHWAY: A RESIDENT PERSPECTIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background GI residency training programs in Canada are comprised of approximately 30% females. Survey data from procedural specialities reveal gender related differences relating to work-life balance, parental obligations, access to role models, and workplace gender discrimination. Aims To determine gender specific differences affecting the choice of GI as a sub-specialty and the experience of GI as a career during residency and fellowship. Methods A 91-question mixed methods survey was electronically disseminated in two recruitment waves to PGY4-6 gastroenterology residents and fellows across Canada between May 7th-July 1st, 2020. The survey consisted of nine groups of questions aimed at understanding personal, professional, financial, and training characteristics. Comparisons were made between self-identified male and female genders. Wilcoxon (Mann Whitney U test) was used for continuous variables while chi-squared test and fisher’s exact test was applied for categorical variables using SAS software. Qualitative thematic analysis was applied for short answer responses with two independent reviewers. Results A total of 122 residents were surveyed with a response rate of 36% (44/122).There were 17 PGY4s, 15 PGY5s, and 12 PGY6s. Females comprised 41% (18/44) of respondents. Women were statistically more likely to take on a predominant caregiver role for children (p=0.012) and state that having children would slow their career advancement (p=0.046). Men were more likely to state that it is preferable to have children during residency (p=0.036) and that their partner’s preference factored into their subspecialty training choice (p=0.009) than women. Male PGY4/5 trainees were more likely to select therapeutic endoscopy for advanced training (p=0.033). No statistical difference was found regarding aspirations for administrative/leadership positions, desired future income, practice setting, academic pursuits, and perspectives on compromising marriage for career. Qualitative analysis suggests non-gender specific challenges related to achieving work-life balance, securing a desired location of practice, and obtaining financial stability are common resident and fellow concerns. Conclusions Our study is the first of its kind within the field of gastroenterology to focus on GI residents and fellows’ experiences within Canadian training programs. Our results show that there exist gender related differences in relation to work-life balance and career advancement. Women may benefit from supports to cope with increased caregiver demands in order to allow them to meet career goals which are similar to their male peers. Funding Agencies None
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".