Follow the money: Investigating gender disparity in industry payments among senior academics and leaders in plastic surgery

Introduction Differences in academic qualifications are cited as the reason behind the documented gender gap in industry sponsorship to academic plastic surgeons. Gendered imbalances in academic metrics narrow among senior academic plastic surgeons. However, it is unknown whether this gender parity translates to industry payments. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of industry payments disbursed to plastic surgeons in 2018. Inclusion criteria encompassed (i) faculty with the rank of professor or a departmental leadership position. Exclusion criteria included faculty (i) who belonged to a speciality besides plastic surgery; (ii) whose gender could not be determined; or (iii) whose name could not be located on the Open Payment Database. Faculty and title were identified using departmental listings of ACGME plastic surgery residency programs. We extracted industry payment data through the Open Payment Database. We also collected details on H-index and time in practice. Statistical analysis included odds ratios (OR) and Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R). Results We identified 316 senior academic plastic surgeons. The cohort was predominately male (88%) and 91% held a leadership role. Among departmental leaders, women were more likely to be an assistant professor (OR 3.9, p = 0.0003) and heads of subdivision (OR 2.1, p = 0.0382) than men. Industry payments were distributed equally to male and female senior plastic surgeons except for speakerships where women received smaller amounts compared to their male counterparts (median payments of $3,675 vs $7,134 for women and men respectively, p<0.0001). Career length and H-index were positively associated with dollar value of total industry payments (R = 0.17, p = 0.0291, and R = 0.14, p = 0.0405, respectively). Conclusion Disparity in industry funding narrows at senior levels in academic plastic surgery. At higher academic levels, industry sponsorship may preferentially fund individuals based on academic productivity and career length. Increased transparency in selection criteria for speakerships is warranted.

Download Full-text

Women Plastic Surgeons of Canada: Empowherment Through Education and Mentorship

Plastic Surgery ◽

10.1177/2292550318767923 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 26 (3) ◽

pp. 145-147 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Helene Retrouvey ◽

Perry Gdalevitch

Keyword(s):

Plastic Surgery ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Gender Disparity ◽

External Factors ◽

Leadership Roles ◽

Canadian Society ◽

Female Surgeons ◽

Surgery Education ◽

Internal And External Factors

Gender disparity in plastic surgery in Canada is an important issue. The Women Plastic Surgeons of Canada (WPSC) group was created to highlight the interests and concerns of female members of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons (CSPS). Women Plastic Surgeons of Canada seeks to teach and implement measures to overcome the internal and external factors contributing to “the plastic ceiling.” In addition, the WPSC group was created to raise awareness about the gender gap in our leadership and implement strategies to empower female surgeons to “lean in” and seek out leadership roles in plastic surgery. Education, mentorship, and networking among female CSPS members are first steps in empowering our female surgeons. All members of the CSPS are encouraged to learn about gender disparity in order to work together to address this issue.

Download Full-text

Sex Disparities in Productivity among Oculoplastic Surgeons

Journal of Academic Ophthalmology ◽

10.1055/s-0041-1740312 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (02) ◽

pp. e210-e215

Author(s):

Mckenzee Chiam ◽

Mona L. Camacci ◽

Alicia Khan ◽

Erik B. Lehman ◽

Seth M. Pantanelli

Keyword(s):

Sex Differences ◽

Assistant Professor ◽

Full Professor ◽

Academic Rank ◽

H Index ◽

Scholarly Output ◽

Career Length ◽

Funding Information ◽

American Society ◽

Nih Funding

Abstract Purpose The aim of the study is to investigate sex differences in academic rank, publication productivity, and National Institute of Health (NIH) funding among oculoplastic surgeons and whether there is an association between American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) membership and scholarly output. Methods Sex, residency graduation year, and academic rank were obtained from institutional websites of 113 U.S. ophthalmology programs. H-indices and m-quotients were obtained from the Scopus database. NIH funding information was obtained from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool. Results Of the 272 surgeons, 74 (30.2%) were females. When adjusted for career duration, differences in female to male proportions were only significant at the rank of assistant professor (assistant: 74.3 vs. 48.5%, p = 0.047; associate: 18.9 vs. 24.6%, p = 0.243; full professor: 13.0 vs. 37.2%, p = 0.114). Women had a shorter career duration than men [10.0 (interquartile range or IQR 12.0) vs. 21.0 (IQR 20.0) years; p < 0.001] and a lower h-index [4.0 (IQR 5.0) vs. 7.0 (IQR 10.0); p < 0.001], but similar m-quotients [0.4 (IQR 0.4) vs. 0.4 (IQR 0.4); p = 0.9890]. Among ASOPRS members, females had a lower h-index than males [5.0 (IQR 6.0) vs. 9.0 (IQR 10.0); p < 0.001] due to career length differences. No difference in productivity between sexes was found among non-ASOPRS members. ASOPRS members from both sexes had higher scholarly output than their non-ASOPRS counterparts. Just 2.7% (2/74) of females compared with 5.3% (9/171) of males received NIH funding (p = 0.681). Conclusion Sex differences in academic ranks and h-indices are likely due to the smaller proportion of females with long career durations. ASOPRS membership may confer opportunities for increased scholarly output.

Download Full-text

Women in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery: An Analysis of Female Authorship in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery Over the Last 10 Years

The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery ◽

10.1177/0748806821991416 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 074880682199141

Author(s):

Pari Swarnkar ◽

Vikram Sinha ◽

Carole Spake ◽

Joseph Crozier ◽

Ledibabari M. Ngaage ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Plastic Surgery ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Aesthetic Surgery ◽

Gender Disparity ◽

Fisher Exact Test ◽

Linear Regression Models ◽

Chi Square ◽

Exact Test ◽

Female Authorship ◽

Number Of Authors

There is a significant gender gap in research conducted by women in plastic surgery. Previous work has not explored female authorship trends in cosmetic plastic surgery. We asked how authorship trends in cosmetic plastic surgery compare with those in plastic surgery overall, over the last 10 years. All the articles published in Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (JPRAS), Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine (JAMA facial plastics), and Aesthetic Surgery Journal. (ASJ) in 2009, 2014, and 2019 were retrieved. The gender of the first and last author was determined. In addition, article type and total number of authors were extracted. Chi-square or Fisher exact test were performed to determine differences between groups Linear regression models were used to investigate whether total number of authors, or female last authorship predicted female first authorship. A total of 4358 articles were reviewed. Of these, 16.6% (n = 723) were published by a female first and/or last author. Percent of female first and/or last author increased with time, from only 12.2% in 2008, to 15.9% in 2014, reaching 21.7% in 2019. A total of 25% (n = 181) of randomized controlled trials were published by a female first and/or last author compared with only 14% (n = 440) of case studies. Female first and last authorship both increased across the 10-year study period, but there were consistently more female first authors than female last authors in all 3 surveyed years ( P < .001). There was an 86% increased chance of female first authorship if the last author was also female ( P < .001), and a 7% increased likelihood of female first authorship ( P = .002). Women have a lower representation in the cosmetic plastic surgery literature than men. This gender disparity gap, however, is decreasing. While encouraging, opportunities for improvement remain.

Download Full-text

Health perception among the elderly in India: A gender perspective

10.1101/2021.12.18.21268022 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Saddaf Naaz Akhtar ◽

Nandita Saikia

Keyword(s):

Health Status ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Well Being ◽

The Elderly ◽

Gender Disparity ◽

Health Perception ◽

Sample Survey ◽

Health Concern ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Current Health

There is an urgent need to understand and study the gender-based comprehensive own-perception approaches about health status. Our primary interest is to elucidate and capture whether and what determinants of gender disparity exist in own-perception about current and change in health status in Indian settings among the elderly. Therefore, we intended to examine the gender disparity in own-perception and their differences among the elderly in India. We used cross-sectional data from the 75th National Sample Survey Organizations (NSSO), collected from July 2017 to June 2018. The analytical sample constitutes 42759 cases of the elderly (eliminating two points of transgender). Thus, 21902 older men and 20857 older women have been considered. Two different measurements of own-perception about health status among the elderly have been used. We have calculated absolute gaps in the prevalence of current self-perception and change in health status by background characteristics. We carried out an ordered logistic regression model (or proportional odds model) to determine the predictors of health perception among the elderly. There is a clear gap between men and women in terms of rating poor perception about health; men generally have reported higher perception about their current health status when it comes to rating them excellent in terms of socio-economic outcomes like income, place of residence, and household structure. Despite numerous limitations, this study addressed the significant public health concern, which is crucial to address the challenge of the elderly health and their perception of well-being. Keywords: current health perception; change in health perception; gender gap; elderly.

Download Full-text

International cross-sectional survey on the use of webinars in plastic surgery: a move towards a hybrid educational model

European Journal of Plastic Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00238-021-01849-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Siri Gowda ◽

Jonathan Simmons ◽

Vimal J. Gokani

Keyword(s):

Plastic Surgery ◽

Educational Model ◽

Cross Sectional Survey ◽

Cross Sectional

Download Full-text

The Gender Wage Gap among Ph.D. Holders: Evidence from Italy

The B E Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy ◽

10.1515/bejeap-2020-0319 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 0 (0) ◽

Author(s):

Vincenzo Alfano ◽

Lorenzo Cicatiello ◽

Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta ◽

Mauro Pinto

Keyword(s):

Gender Gap ◽

Gender Wage Gap ◽

Wage Gap ◽

Decomposition Analysis ◽

Stem Fields ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Educational Qualification ◽

Employment Conditions ◽

Quantile Decomposition ◽

Selection Of

Abstract This paper contributes to the literature on the gender wage gap by empirically analyzing those workers who hold the highest possible educational qualification, i.e., a Ph.D. The analysis relies on recent Italian cross-sectional data collected through a survey on the employment conditions of Ph.D. holders. The Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition analysis and quantile decomposition analysis are carried out, and the selection of Ph.D. holders into employment and STEM/non-STEM fields of specialization is taken into account. Findings suggest that a gender gap in hourly wages exists among Ph.D. holders, with sizeable differences by sector of employment and field of specialization.

Download Full-text

Association between Industry Payments and Scholarly Impact among Academic Ophthalmologists

Journal of Academic Ophthalmology ◽

10.1055/s-0039-1677681 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (01) ◽

pp. e1-e8

Author(s):

Michael Solotke ◽

Susan Forster ◽

Jessica Chow ◽

Jenesis Duran ◽

Hasna Karim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Outcome ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Academic Rank ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

H Index ◽

Residency Programs ◽

Scholarly Impact ◽

The Mean ◽

And Gender ◽

Open Payments

Purpose The aim of this article is to examine the association between industry payments to ophthalmologists and scholarly impact. Design Retrospective cross-sectional study. Methods All ophthalmology faculty at United States accredited ophthalmology residency programs were included in this study. The main exposure was industry payments to ophthalmologists in 2016, as reported in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments Database. The primary outcome was Hirsch index (H-index), a measure of scholarly impact. Results Among 1,653 academic ophthalmologists in our study, 1,225 (74%) received industry payments in 2016. We did not observe a difference between the mean H-index of ophthalmologists receiving any industry payments versus those not receiving any payments (p = 0.68). In analysis including only ophthalmologists who received industry payments, H-index differed significantly by payment amount: 12.6 for ophthalmologists receiving less than $100, 12.2 for those receiving $100 to 1,000, 18.8 for those receiving $1,000 to 10,000, 21.3 for those receiving $10,000 to 100,000, and 29.4 for those receiving greater than $100,000 (p < 0.001). Within each academic rank and gender, industry payments greater than $1,000 were associated with a higher H-index (p < 0.05). Conclusions Although our analysis cannot prove causality, we observed a significant association between industry payments and scholarly impact among academic ophthalmologists, even after adjusting for gender, academic rank, and subspecialty. Prospective studies should further evaluate this relationship.

Download Full-text

Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051224 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (7) ◽

pp. e051224

Author(s):

Vaidehi Misra ◽

Frozan Safi ◽

Kathryn A Brewerton ◽

Wei Wu ◽

Robin Mason ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Data Extraction ◽

Gender Disparity ◽

High Impact ◽

Original Research ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical Journals ◽

The Usa ◽

Study Characteristics ◽

Data Elements

ObjectivesEvaluate gender differences in authorship of COVID-19 articles in high-impact medical journals compared with other topics.DesignCross-sectional review.Data sourcesMedline database.Eligibility criteriaArticles published from 1 January to 31 December 2020 in the seven leading general medical journals by impact factor. Article types included primary research, reviews, editorials and commentaries.Data extractionKey data elements were whether the study topic was related to COVID-19 and names of the principal and the senior authors. A hierarchical approach was used to determine the likely gender of authors. Logistic regression assessed the association of study characteristics, including COVID-19 status, with authors’ likely gender; this was quantified using adjusted ORs (aORs).ResultsWe included 2252 articles, of which 748 (33.2%) were COVID-19-related and 1504 (66.8%) covered other topics. A likely gender was determined for 2138 (94.9%) principal authors and 1890 (83.9%) senior authors. Men were significantly more likely to be both principal (1364 men; 63.8%) and senior (1332 men; 70.5%) authors. COVID-19-related articles were not associated with the odds of men being principal (aOR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; p=0.89) or senior authors (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; p=0.71) relative to other topics. Articles with men as senior authors were more likely to have men as principal authors (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.83; p<0.001). Men were more likely to author articles reporting original research and those with corresponding authors based outside the USA and Europe.ConclusionsWomen were substantially under-represented as authors among articles in leading medical journals; this was not significantly different for COVID-19-related articles. Study limitations include potential for misclassification bias due to the name-based analysis. Results suggest that barriers to women’s authorship in high-impact journals during COVID-19 are not significantly larger than barriers that preceded the pandemic and that are likely to continue beyond it.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020186702.

Download Full-text