The Experiences of Motherhood in Female Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to systematically synthesize the existing literature on the experiences of motherhood in female surgeons both during surgical training and as staff physicians, to identify knowledge gaps, and to provide recommendations for institutional changes to better support pregnant female surgeons. BACKGROUND: There are disproportionately fewer medical students pursuing surgical specialties, as surgery is often seen as incompatible with childbearing and pregnancy. However, no review has summarized the published literature on the collective experiences of female surgeons in navigating motherhood. METHODS: Four databases were searched and 1106 abstracts were identified. Forty-two studies were included and a thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: path toward motherhood (n=18), realities of motherhood (n=25), medical culture and its impact on career and family life (n=24), and institutional reproductive wellness policies (n=21). Female surgeons are more likely to delay motherhood until after training and have high rates of assisted reproductive technology use. Pregnancy during surgical training is associated with negative perception from peers, pregnancy complications, and scheduling challenges. Maternity leave policies and breastfeeding and childcare facilities are variable and often inadequate. Many female surgeons would agree that greater institutional support would help support women in both their roles as mothers and as surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Both female residents and staff surgeons experience significant and unique barriers before, during, and after motherhood that impact their personal and professional lives. Understanding the unique challenges that mothers face when pursuing surgical specialties is critical to achieving gender equity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".