Gender Equity in Radiation Oncology: Culture Change is a Marathon, not a Sprint

The Concerning Disaggregation of Gender and Racial/Ethnicity Disparity Investigation at Recent ASCO Annual Meetings

OBJECTIVES

There has been a recent emphasis in the peer-reviewed oncology literature on examining disparities by gender. Such emphasis provides an excellent opportunity to simultaneously examine race/ethnicity disparities in the same cohort. The degree to which gender disparities research has been performed concomitantly with racial disparities research at prominent oncologic societies has yet to be investigated.

METHODS

ABSTRACTs presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting were reviewed. Abstracts selected for the oral abstract or clinical science symposium sessions at the 2020, 2021, and 2022 annual meetings were evaluated to determine the amount of gender disparities research presented. Such research was further assessed to determine whether racial/ethnicity disparities were examined simultaneously.

RESULTS

From 2020 to 2022, 1219 abstracts were presented at the ASCO annual meetings, oral abstract or clinical science symposium sessions. Of these, 7 involved gender disparities examination, of which only 2 (29%) concomitantly examined race/ethnicity. No study since 2020 concomitantly examined gender and racial disparities.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 70% of gender disparities work presented at ASCO has been disaggregated from concomitant racial disparities examination, with complete disaggregation since 2021. Gender disparities work remains a miniscule aspect of the overall research landscape. Future work in examining gender disparities may be best aggregated with racial/ethnicity disparities to optimize timely solutions in both areas; such work could potentially be incentivized from the inclusion criteria of future funding mechanisms.

Gender equality and leadership in radiation oncology research: a plea to women to come forward

This commentary paper describes a glass ceiling in the field of academia and specifically in radiation oncology research. Evidence from the literature and personal views are presented describing some of the issues leading to underrepresentation of women in academic leadership roles. The values and drivers for women in academia are discussed. Finally, a plea is made to women to come forward and consider leadership position and to academic institutions and funders of research to reconsider the traditional metrics of academic success.

Prospective assessment of stress and health concerns of radiation oncology staff during the COVID-19 pandemic

•

The COVID-19 pandemic required continuous adjustment of radiotherapy practice.

•

Global stress levels and health concerns of staff followed COVID-19 infection waves.

•

Frontline workers with direct patient contact were most affected by the pandemic.

•

Beyond COVID-19, weekly regular online surveys can help to monitor staff well-being.

Introduction and background

The COVID-19 pandemic has required rapid and repetitive adjustment of radiotherapy practice, hospital-level and department-level organization and hygiene measures. To prospectively monitor and manage stress levels and health concerns, employees of a radiation oncology department were invited to participate in weekly online surveys during the first year of the pandemic.

Materials and methods

Starting March 31st, 2020, cross-sectional online surveys were distributed to all employees of the Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich. The survey included questions about the profession, the work setting, the global stress level as well as the health concerns during the past work week. Stress levels and health concerns were assessed on a 10-point scale. SurveyMonkey® was used to conduct the survey. Distribution was performed via email. Participation was anonymous and voluntary.

Results

Between March 2020 and February 2021, 50 weekly surveys were distributed to 127 employees on average and resulted in 1,877 individual responses. The average response rate was 30%. The mean global stress level varied significantly by profession, ranging from 2.7 (±2.5) points for administrative staff to 6.9 (±2.3) points for radiation therapy technicians (p < 0.001). The mean global stress level was highest with 4.8 (±2.9) points for in-hospital work with direct patient contact. Health concerns were highest regarding family and friends with 4.0 (±3.1) points on average. Changes of the stress level varied in correlation with infection waves.

Conclusion

Weekly online surveys for prospective assessment of stress levels and health concerns were successfully conducted during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, indicating their feasibility and value to monitor profession and workplace specific stress patterns and to allowed for tailored interventions. The physical and mental health of frontline healthcare workers in radiation oncology should remain a top priority for departmental leadership beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.