Research Involvement and Gender Disparities Among Pediatric Surgeons: A Multinational Survey

Abstract

Background

There is a lack of background regarding knowledge about the involvement of pediatric surgeons (PSs) in scientific activities. We aimed to investigate scientific activity among PSs worldwide.

Methods

An anonymous online questionnaire in English collected demographic data, time spent on research, participation in scientific conferences, publications, and funding for conference attendance. Co-authors distributed it through national and international pediatric surgery societies and groups to reach their members.

Results

A total of 526 PSs responded (57% female). About 55% of those surveyed reside in Europe. Most worked in university hospitals (61%), 9% at a university faculty, and 0.8% in a research facility. Only 23% were engaged in research, with similar rates for females (21%) and males (26%) (NS).

Additional time out of working hours was required for research, particularly among female PSs. Full compensation for research was reported by 10% of females and 29% of males (p < 0.02). Around 73% had attended at least one local, regional, national, or international scientific conference (75% of females vs. 70% of males, NS), while 84% had no funding for at least one event (87% of females vs. 80% of males, NS). Scientific paper was presented by 69% at some conference. At least one scientific paper was published by 20% (17% of females vs. 23% of males, NS).

Conclusion

Research involvement among PSs is limited, with unpaid work and funding gaps, particularly among women. Potential solutions include improving research training, structured mentorship (especially for women), institutional support for protected research time, and equitable access to funding opportunities.

Keywords

pediatric surgery - survey - research opportunities - equality - gender bias

Publication History

Received: 23 February 2024

Accepted: 03 July 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
04 July 2025

Article published online:
17 July 2025

• References

• 1 Senecal JB, Metcalfe K, Wilson K, Woldie I, Porter LA. Barriers to translational research in Windsor Ontario: a survey of clinical care providers and health researchers. J Transl Med 2021; 19 (01) 479
• 2 Campbell EG, Weissman JS, Moy E, Blumenthal D. Status of clinical research in academic health centers: views from the research leadership. JAMA 2001; 286 (07) 800-806
• 3 Saeed I, Khan NF, Bari A, Khan RA. Factors contributing to the lack of interest in research activities among postgraduate medical students. Pak J Med Sci 2018; 34 (04) 913-917
• 4 Moses III H. Researchers, funding, and priorities: the razor's edge. JAMA 2009; 302 (09) 1001-1002
• 5 Zinner DE, Campbell EG. Life-science research within US academic medical centers. Am Med Assocaition. 2009; 302 (09) 969-976
• 6 Brown JVE, Crampton PES, Finn GM, Morgan JE. From the sticky floor to the glass ceiling and everything in between: protocol for a systematic review of barriers and facilitators to clinical academic careers and interventions to address these, with a focus on gender inequality. Syst Rev 2020 9.
• 7 Witteman HO, Hendricks M, Straus S, Tannenbaum C. Gender bias in CIHR Foundation grant awarding. Lancet 2019; 394 (10214): e41-e42
• 8 Burns KEA, Straus SE, Liu K, Rizvi L, Guyatt G. Gender differences in grant and personnel award funding rates at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research based on research content area: a retrospective analysis. PLoS Med 2019; 16 (10) e1002935
• 9 Lundine J, Bourgeault IL, Clark J, Heidari S, Balabanova D. The gendered system of academic publishing. Lancet 2018; 391 (10132): 1754-1756
• 10 Filardo G, da Graca B, Sass DM, Pollock BD, Smith EB, Martinez MAM. Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014). BMJ 2016; 352: i847
• 11 Penny M, Jeffries R, Grant J, Davies SC. Women and academic medicine: a review of the evidence on female representation. J R Soc Med 2014; 107 (07) 259-263
• 12 Alli A, Lin T, Thorndyke LE, Parekh R, Nunez A. Advancing women to leadership positions through individual actions and institutional reform. Pediatrics 2021; 148 (Suppl. 02) e2021051440D
• 13 Joseph MM, Ahasic AM, Clark J, Templeton K. State of women in medicine: history, challenges, and the benefits of a diverse workforce. Pediatrics 2021; 148 (Suppl. 02) e2021051440C
• 14 Andriole DA, Wolfson RK. The physician-investigator workforce: looking ahead. Acad Med 2021; 96 (04) 486-489
• 15 Huang X, Dovat S, Mailman RB, Thiboutot DM, Berini D, Parent LJ. Building a system to engage and sustain research careers for physicians. Acad Med 2021; 96 (04) 490-494
• 16 Paturel A. Why women leave academic medicine. Association of American Medical Colleges. October 1, 2019. Accessed at: https://www.aamc.org/news/why-women-leave-medicine
• 17 British Medical Association. Women in Academic Medicine: Developing Equality in Governance and Management for Career Progression. British Medical Association; 2008
• 18 Blake M, Valle I. La. Who Applies for Research Funding? Key Factors Shaping Funding Application Behaviour among Women and Men in British Higher Education Institutions. Wellcome Trust and National Centre for Social Research; 2000