Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Academic Ophthalmology 2021; 13(02): e210-e215
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740312
Research Article

Sex Disparities in Productivity among Oculoplastic Surgeons

Mckenzee Chiam 
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania
,
Mona L. Camacci 
2   Department of Ophthalmology, David & Ilene Flaum Eye Institute University of Rochester, Rochester, New York
,
Alicia Khan
3   School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington, Dist. of Columbia
,
Erik B. Lehman
4   Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania
,
Seth M. Pantanelli 
1   Department of Ophthalmology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations Financial Disclosure S.M.P. serves in the role of consultant, advisory board member, and Medical Monitor for Carl Zeiss Meditec. He also serves in the role of consultant to Bausch & Lomb. These relationships are not relevant to the present work. Remaining authors have no financial or other interests to disclose.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

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.

Keywords

oculoplastic - ophthalmology - academic rank - publication productivity - NIH funding - disparities - gender


Publication History

Received: 16 May 2021

Accepted: 13 September 2021

Article published online:
05 December 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Association of American Medical Colleges. Active Physicians by Sex and Specialty 2017. Accessed April 1, 2020 at: https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/workforce/interactive-data/active-physicians-sex-and-specialty-2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Christmann L. Women and their Role in Ophthalmology. Women In Ophthalmology.. Accessed April 1, 2020 at: https://www.wioonline.org/news/women-role-ophthalmology/ 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Barzansky B, Etzel SI. Medical Schools in the United States, 2018-2019. JAMA 2019; 322 (10) 986-995
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Xierali IM, Nivet MA, Wilson MR. Current and future status of diversity in ophthalmologist workforce. JAMA Ophthalmol 2016; 134 (09) 1016-1023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cruz OA, Johnson NB, Thomas SM. Twenty-five years of leadership: a look at trends in tenure and appointments of chairs of ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2009; 116 (04) 807-811
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Camacci ML, Lu A, Lehman EB, Scott IU, Bowie E, Pantanelli SM. Association between sex composition and publication productivity of journal editorial and professional society board members in ophthalmology. JAMA Ophthalmol 2020; 138 (05) 451-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dotan G, Qureshi HM, Gaton DD. Chairs of United States Academic Ophthalmology Departments: a descriptive analysis and trends. Am J Ophthalmol 2018; 196: 26-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lopez SA, Svider PF, Misra P, Bhagat N, Langer PD, Eloy JA. Gender differences in promotion and scholarly impact: an analysis of 1460 academic ophthalmologists. J Surg Educ 2014; 71 (06) 851-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005; 102 (46) 16569-16572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Eloy JA, Svider PF, Cherla DV. et al. Gender disparities in research productivity among 9952 academic physicians. Laryngoscope 2013; 123 (08) 1865-1875
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Svider PF, Lopez SA, Husain Q, Bhagat N, Eloy JA, Langer PD. The association between scholarly impact and National Institutes of Health funding in ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2014; 121 (01) 423-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Svider PF, D'Aguillo CM, White PE. et al. Gender differences in successful National Institutes of Health funding in ophthalmology. J Surg Educ 2014; 71 (05) 680-688
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Thiessen C, Venable G, Ridenhour N, Kerr N. Publication productivity for academic ophthalmologists and academic ophthalmology departments in the United States: an analytical report. J Clin Acad Ophthalmol 2016; 08 (01) e19-e29
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Reed DA, Enders F, Lindor R, McClees M, Lindor KD. Gender differences in academic productivity and leadership appointments of physicians throughout academic careers. Acad Med 2011; 86 (01) 43-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Eloy JA, Svider P, Chandrasekhar SS. et al. Gender disparities in scholarly productivity within academic otolaryngology departments. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2013; 148 (02) 215-222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dyrbye LN, Shanafelt TD, Balch CM, Satele D, Sloan J, Freischlag J. Relationship between work-home conflicts and burnout among American surgeons: a comparison by sex. Arch Surg 2011; 146 (02) 211-217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jolly S, Griffith KA, DeCastro R, Stewart A, Ubel P, Jagsi R. Gender differences in time spent on parenting and domestic responsibilities by high-achieving young physician-researchers. Ann Intern Med 2014; 160 (05) 344-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Zhuge Y, Kaufman J, Simeone DM, Chen H, Velazquez OC. Is there still a glass ceiling for women in academic surgery?. Ann Surg 2011; 253 (04) 637-643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kaplan SH, Sullivan LM, Dukes KA, Phillips CF, Kelch RP, Schaller JG. Sex differences in academic advancement. Results of a national study of pediatricians. N Engl J Med 1996; 335 (17) 1282-1289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Azad AD, Rosenblatt TR, Chandramohan A, Fountain TR, Kossler AL. Progress towards parity. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 37 (03) 236-240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nicholson JM, Ioannidis JP. Research grants: conform and be funded. Nature 2012; 492 (7427): 34-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Colaco M, Svider PF, Mauro KM, Eloy JA, Jackson-Rosario I. Is there a relationship between National Institutes of Health funding and research impact on academic urology?. J Urol 2013; 190 (03) 999-1003
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Fraser G. Evaluating inclusive gender identity measures for use in quantitative psychological research. Psychol Sex 2018; 9 (04) 343-357
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kokol P, Vošner HB. Discrepancies among Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed coverage of funding information in medical journal articles. J Med Libr Assoc 2018; 106 (01) 81-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar