Eliminating the Glass Ceiling in Academic Psychiatry

The role of gender as a barrier to the professional development of psychiatrists

BACKGROUND

Despite efforts toward greater gender equality in clinical and academic psychiatry in recent years, more information is needed about the challenges in professional development within psychiatry, and how these may vary with gender.

METHODS

A cross-sectional 27-item online survey was conducted with psychiatrists and psychiatric trainee members of the European Psychiatric Association.

RESULTS

A total of 561 psychiatrists and psychiatric trainees from 35 European countries participated representing a response rate of 52.8% for women and 17.7% for men from a total sample of 1,580. The specific challenges that women face in their professional development fall into two categories. One comprised women's negative attitudes concerning their abilities in self-promotion and networking. The other identified environmental barriers related to lack of opportunity and support and gender discrimination. Compared to men, women reported higher rates of gender discrimination in terms of professional advancement. Women were less likely to agree that their institutions had regular activities promoting inclusion, diversity, and training to address implicit gender bias. Working in high-income countries compared to middle-income countries relates to reporting institutional support for career progression.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are an open call to hospital leaders, deans of medical schools, and department chairs to increase efforts to eradicate bias against women and create safer, inclusive, and respectful environments for all psychiatrists, a special call to women psychiatrists to be aware of inner tendencies to avoid self-promotion and networking and to think positively and confidently about themselves and their abilities.

Representation of women at American Psychiatric Association annual meetings over 10 years (between 2009 and 2019)

OBJECTIVE

Sex disparity is a major societal issue. The aim of this paper was to describe changes in the representation of women among speakers of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) annual meeting over 10 years, between 2009 and 2019 and to compare them to changes in the proportion of women among American psychiatrists.

METHODS

Data were collected from the programs of the APA annual meetings of 2009 and 2019, and from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

There were 1,138 distinct speakers at the 2009 conference and 1,784 at the 2019 conference. The number of distinct female speakers increased from 413 (36.3%) to 813 (45.6%). The proportion of female speakers at the meetings was almost equivalent to the proportion of women in the American psychiatrists' workforce. The number of female chairs increased from 158 (39.6%) to 322 (46.4%). There were 38 female speakers in child and adolescent psychiatry in 2009 (51.4% of 74 speakers) and 74 in 2019 (51.0% of 155 speakers).

CONCLUSIONS

The representation of women at the APA annual meetings increased between 2009 and 2019. At the same time, the growth in the percentage of women in the American psychiatrists' workforce was slower. The APA appears to promote female representation during its annual meetings.

Who We Are Today: a National Survey of Diversity Among Psychiatry Program Directors

OBJECTIVE

In March 2018, the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training (AADPRT) formed the Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Committee. One of the committee's goals was to understand the AADPRT membership's composition and their perceptions of D&I. This study's objective was to identify the demographic characteristics of the AADPRT membership.

METHODS

Program directors were invited by email to participate in an anonymous survey. The survey collected participants' demographic information including gender, race/ethnicity, training background, age, disability/differently abled status, job role, geographic region where their program is located, type of program, and their program's community setting.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty six of 657 AADPRT members (39%) completed the survey. Respondents were mostly White (64.5%) followed by Asian/Southeast Asian (17.6%), Hispanic/Latinx (4.3%), and Black (1.6%). Only 13.3% of the participants were international medical graduates. Women were more prevalent (61.7%) than men (37.5%), and 9.4% self-identified as members of the LGBTQ+ Community.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first systematic investigation into the diversity among psychiatry program directors throughout the USA and Canada. Future qualitative studies are needed to better understand the reasons behind this initial study's findings. Potential concerns requiring exploration include the possibility of the program director role serving as a "glass ceiling" for some women and a "leaky pipeline" in academia for groups underrepresented in medicine.

Gender gap in mental health research productivity: Results from Qatar

OBJECTIVES

Qatar's contribution to biomedical research has increased significantly in the past couple of decades, but the exact participation of women researchers remains obscure. This study aims to explore the gender gap in research production of Qatar in the field of mental health.

METHODS

The authors searched five databases for published articles from Qatar in the field of mental health from 2015 to 2019. The authors examined the retrieved articles for the gender gap in 1) the number of researchers. 2) the numbers of articles produced by men-only research teams vs. the research teams included women. 3) h-index. 4) foreign collaboration. 5) research design and themes.

RESULTS

The authors identified 152 published articles in the field of mental health. Men researchers outnumbered women researchers (124 vs. 81). Men had statistically significant higher h-index compared to women (14.6 ± 1.4 vs 4.6 ± 0.9; p < 0.001). Research teams that included women had produced fewer articles compared to men-only groups (41.4 %), they also had less foreign collaborators (68 % vs. 91 %, p = 0.001). They were less involved in experimental research and more involved in observational research compared to male-only research groups (15.90 % vs. 38.6 % and 47.6 % vs. 25 % respectively; p = 0.034). In articles with women authors, women were the first authors in 50.8 % of the articles, and men were the senior authors in 79.4 % of them.

CONCLUSION

The study identifies gender gaps in some aspects of research productivity in Qatar. This data will provide a benchmark for future research in the field.

Current state of Grand Rounds in U.S. pathology training programs

Grand Rounds are held with variable frequency in many academic pathology departments, but their exact goal is uncertain, and the type of subjects covered, and presenters have not been studied. We aimed to gather information about the current state of pathology grand rounds (PGR). We identified all US pathology residency programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and searched their websites for information regarding PGR, extracting data on their existence, frequency and timing. For a representative subgroup of institutions from all US regions and program sizes, we tabulated the 2017-2018 PGR titles and presenters (gender, degree(s), resident/fellow, faculty academic rank). We found that 71 of 142 (50%) ACGME-accredited programs had PGR, more often in programs with >12 residents (53/88, 60%). PGR were scheduled most commonly weekly, on Thursdays, and at noon. We analyzed 1019 PGR presentations from 41 institutions located in 26 US states. Among the 1105 presenters, 183 (16.56%) were trainees, 74 (6.7%) were non-academic, and 848 (76.7%) were faculty, 559 male and 289 female (M/F = 1.93). M/F ratio increased with academic rank, from 1.0 (117/115) for assistant, to 2.0 (135/68) for associate, and 2.9 (307/106) for full professors. Topics covered by PGR belonged to anatomic pathology (357), clinical pathology (209), research (184) or other medical or surgical specialties (149). Our study suggests that trainees are a major intended audience of pathology grand round. Unfortunately, there is a gender gap among pathology grand round presenters that widens with increasing academic rank of presenters.

Gender Trends in Authorship in Psychiatry Journals From 2008 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Women are currently underrepresented in academic psychiatry. As publication activity reflects both leadership and participation in academia, we examined temporal trends in women's authorship by conducting a large-scale bibliometric study of psychiatry journals.

METHODS

We examined changes in proportions of women in the first, last, and overall authorship positions over time; relationship to journal impact factor and editorial board makeup; and rates of transition to senior author status using original research articles published in the 24 highest-impact psychiatry journals between January 2008 and May 2018.

RESULTS

In 30,934 articles, women represented 40.0% of all authors in 2008 and 44.8% in 2018, with a significant increase in the percentage of women as first authors (2008: 43.5%, 2018: 49.5%; B = 0.64, p = .002) and last authors over time (2008: 30.0%, 2018: 35.7%; B = 0.64, p = 1 × 10^-5). Articles with women as last authors were significantly more likely than those with men as last authors to have a woman as first author (χ²₁ = 126.1, p < 2.2 × 10^-16). Women exhibited slower rates of transition to the last author position (log rank p = 2 × 10^-16); time to 10% transition was 5 years for men and 9 years for women.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate continued improvement in the representation of women authors in psychiatry journals, resulting in near parity in first authors. However, slower rates of transition to the senior author position and continued underrepresentation of women as senior authors suggest ongoing challenges in achieving gender parity in academic leadership. At the present rate of change for last authors (0.64% increase per year), women would achieve parity in senior authorship in ∼20 to 25 years.