Sexual Harassment in Ophthalmology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: High rates of sexual harassment were reported among ophthalmologists who responded to a survey in 2018. A comparison with the rates in 2023 seems warranted following increased initiatives to combat sexual harassment. Objectives: To compare the rates and characteristics of sexual harassment in ophthalmology from survey respondents in 2018 and 2023 and to investigate rates of gender discrimination among the 2023 respondents. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional, observational survey study, the survey was administered anonymously using Google Forms through the Women in Ophthalmology email blast list from August 25 to September 25, 2023. Primarily female ophthalmologists or ophthalmology trainees were surveyed in the United States and Canada. The study was determined to be exempt by the University of Washington institutional review board because it involved an anonymous, low-risk survey of adults. Participants provided consent electronically. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of sexual harassment in ophthalmology, number of occurrences in the past 5 years, and gender discrimination. Rates were compared between the 2018 and 2023 surveys. Results: Of 1051 emails sent, 692 (65.8%) were opened, and of those opened, 289 of 692 eligible participants (41.8%) responded, so that the respondents represented 289 (27.5%) of the 1051 emails sent. Among the 288 survey participants who provided gender data, there were 282 women (97.9%), 3 men (1.0%), 1 nonbinary or third gender participant (0.3%), and 2 other participants (ie, they preferred not to say or preferred to self-describe) (0.6%), with 113 (39.2%) aged 31 to 40 years. Of the 289 survey respondents in 2023, 172 (59.5%) experienced sexual harassment in ophthalmology compared with 265 of 447 (59.3%) surveyed in 2018 (difference, 0.2%; 95% CI, -7.0% to 7.5%; P = .95). Also, of the 172 respondents in 2023 who reported experiencing sexual harassment, 107 (62.2%) experienced it within the past 5 years compared with 125 of 265 respondents (47.2%) who reported experiencing it in 2018 (difference, 15.0%; 95% CI, 5.5%-24.2%; P < .001). In 2023, 41 of 170 respondents (24.1%) reported their most severe experience to an authority compared with 40 of 265 (15.1%) in 2018 (difference, 9.0%; 95% CI, 1.3%-16.8%; P = .02). Of 287 survey respondents in 2023, 244 (85.0%) experienced gender discrimination. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, the rates of sexual harassment among respondents remained high 5 years after a survey on sexual harassment in ophthalmology, with higher frequency of recent experiences and continued low reporting rates. With other forms of gender discrimination also highly prevalent among respondents, these results support pursuit of validated strategies to foster a culture of zero tolerance toward harassment and discrimination.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".