Poster 372: Women in Leadership in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Societies Throughout the World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The proportion of women in orthopaedic surgery is low compared to other specialties, despite a equal numbers of women and men entering the field of medicine. This gender disparity persists across various aspects of orthopaedic sports medicine. The purpose of this study was to characterize the number of women in leadership positions in orthopaedic sports medicine and arthroscopy societies throughout the world and compare the percentages of women vs men in leadership positions. Methods: Publicly available websites for orthopaedic sports medicine societies throughout the world were evaluated during March 2022. Non-surgical sports medicine societies were excluded, as were societies lacking publicly available leadership information. Data were collected as listed on the websites, and categorized into Board of Directors, Executive Committee, Office, Council (all typically included Presidential line, Vice-President, Treasurer, Secretary, or other specific high-ranking members), and Committee Chairs (excluded general committee members). Results: Of the 46 societies, 16 (34.8%) were in Europe, 10 (21.7%) in Asia, 6 (13.0%) in South America, 5 (10.9%) in North America, 3 in the Middle East (6.5%), 2 in Africa (4.4%), 2 in Australia (4.4%), and 2 were international organizations (4.4%). Four countries had more than one orthopaedic sports medicine society: Argentina, Israel, Australia, and Mexico. As represented by Figure 1, the Board of Directors were comprised of 2.5% women (4/161), the Executive Committees were 7.1% women (11/154), Committee Chairs were 9.4% women (13/138), Officers were 15.8% women (3/19), Councils were 5.9% women (1/17), and Spokespersons were 16.7% women (1/6). For the Board of Directors, North America and Europe led in women representation with 4.0% and 3.8%, South America had 2.0%, and societies from the Middle East and Asia reported no women. Regarding Executive Committee, North America had the most women with 27.8%, and the remaining regions ranged from 0.0-7.9%. For Committee Chairs, both European and International societies had around 8% women in leadership (8.0% and 7.7%, respectively), yet North America had double with 16.7% women. Of the regions reporting Officers, Asia and Europe had similar percentages (16.7% and 18.2%), whereas Australia reported zero women in office. Only one region reported electing a Council and two regions listed Spokespersons. Conclusions: This study highlights the gender disparities in leadership positions in orthopaedic sports medicine societies throughout the world. The visibility of women in high-ranking positions may contribute to the interest of women and other minorities in the field of sports medicine and help improve diversity. Future studies should investigate factors contributing to the paucity of women in leadership positions and identify ways to increase the proportion of women in orthopaedic sports medicine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.007 |
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".