A83 GENDER-RELATED BARRIERS TO ADVANCEMENT ALONG THE GASTROENTEROLOGY CAREER PATHWAY: AN INTERNAL MEDICINE RESIDENT PERSPECTIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Women comprise approximately 31% of the Canadian and 19% of the American gastroenterology population. This gender disparity widens throughout training, with relative gender parity in medical school, slightly less female representation in internal medicine, then with the widest gender disparity in gastroenterology training and practice. Aims Our aim was to understand the gender-related barriers to advancement along the gastroenterology training pathway specifically among internal medicine residents. Methods A 72-question online survey was distributed by email to internal medicine residents from post-graduate years (PGY) 1, 2, and 3 at the University of Toronto. The initial email was followed by two reminder emails over 1 month. Questions pertained to demographic characteristics, social situation, career aspirations, academic pursuits, and career challenges. Data analysis was performed using SAS software. Continuous variables were compared using Wilcoxon (Mann Whitney U test) and categorical variables with chi-squared and Fisher’s exact test. Results 40 residents completed the survey. 62.5% were female and most were PGY1 or 2 (n=18, 45% for each; PGY3 was n=4, 10%). Women were more likely to be single (44% vs. 27%, p = 0.0423). In terms of scholarly involvement, women more frequently had additional academic pursuits than their male counterparts (92% vs. 60%, p = 0.0195). For training-related challenges, women more often reported different expectations were put on them due to their due to their background, specifically related to gender (70% vs. 33%, p = 0.0356). Women described more challenges with support staff compared to their colleagues (36% vs. 0%, p = 0.0105), and stated that gender was the reason. Women were also more likely to report that their clinical competence was challenged compared to their peers (32% vs. 7%, p = 0.0384). Outside of work, women more often felt a work-life misbalance due to coordinating childcare (64% vs. 27%, p = 0.0085). Regarding career aspirations, men more often endorsed wanting a hospital leadership role (67% vs. 32%, p = 0.0201). They also rated renumeration as a driving motivation for applying to a subspecialty more often (47% vs. 12%, p = 0.0085) and rated their desired future personal income to over $70,000 more than women (p = 0.0402). Conclusions This study is the first to examine gender-related barriers to advancement in gastroenterology at the crucial internal medicine resident level. Women more often reported training-related challenges with others’ expectations and judgments of their clinical competence, as well as personal challenges with coordinating childcare. A deeper understanding of these differences may shape support interventions to help women meet their career goals. 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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".