Medical Student Perceptions of the Barriers to Entering Orthopaedic Surgery Differ by Gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The value of gender representation has been increasingly recognised in medicine, yet women represent only 13.6% of orthopaedic surgeons in Canada. The primary objective of this study was to determine barriers identified by medical students considering pursuing a career in orthopaedic surgery. The secondary objective was to assess for gender-based differences in barriers identified by medical students. METHODS: A cross-sectional mixed-methods survey was distributed to final-year students at a Canadian medical school. Descriptive analyses were calculated for the study population and gender subgroups. To compare responses between gender subgroups, chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were employed for binary data, and non-parametric Mann-Whitney U tests for ordinal data. Open-text responses were reviewed for descriptions of students' experiences in orthopaedics. RESULTS: Sixty-four medical students participated, representing a response rate of 59.3%. Male culture and the need for physical strength were identified as strong barriers to pursuing a career in orthopaedics. Additionally, women reported less exposure (p = 0.003), disproportionate constraints (i.e., scrutiny of performance based on gender, p = 0.001), less mentorship (p = 0.028), more concerns about verbal (p < 0.001) and sexual abuse (p = 0.013), and higher rates of direct discouragement from pursuing orthopaedics than men (p = 0.035). Open-text responses indicated that orthopaedics was not considered welcoming to all medical students. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to characterise medical student perceptions of barriers to gender equity in orthopaedic surgery in Canada. Fostering a more equitable environment will necessitate a paradigm shift in the educational framework toward orthopaedic surgery.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".