ArticleJournal of graduate medical education2019
Gender Differences in Retention and Promotion Among Generalists Who Graduated From Research-Intensive Fellowships.
Article in Journal of graduate medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social capital as a catalyst for gender inequality: A scoping review of networking disparities in academic medicine.Cancer · 2025Article
- Cross-Sectional Gender Analysis of US Radiation Oncology Residency Programs in 2019: More Than a Pipeline Issue?Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGeneralists who pursue research-intensive fellowships develop research skills and mentor-mentee relationships. Whether gender disparities in retention and promotion exist among this research-trained cohort is understudied.
objectiveWe measured whether disparities exist among graduates of research-intensive fellowships and how mentorship influences them.
methodsWe surveyed generalists (internal medicine, pediatrics, family medicine, combined internal medicine-pediatrics) between July and August 2016 who graduated from research-intensive fellowships. Generalists ("mentees") were asked whether they remained or were promoted, and to name up to 10 influential mentors during or within 5 years of fellowship. Multivariable logistic regression estimated associations between mentee gender and retention and promotion. Next, we separately included 3 network characteristics: (1) mentee degrees (number of mentors reported per mentee); (2) mean mentor betweenness centrality (importance of each mentor within the network); and (3) largest community membership (mentee status in the largest interconnected mentor-mentee group within the network). All models adjusted for generalists' race, specialty, fellowship institution, and publications.
resultsOne hundred sixty-two graduates (51%) representing 19 institutions responded. In adjusted analyses, compared to men, women were as likely to remain in academic medicine (odds ratio [OR] 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-4.89;
conclusionsDespite remaining in academic medicine as frequently as their male counterparts, fellowship-trained women were promoted less often. Features of mentors, measured using network analysis, may not explain these observed differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.