Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38967920›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Gender Differences in the Path to Medical School Deanship.

Maya S Iyer, Carol Bradford, Amy S Gottlieb, David B Kling, Reshma Jagsi, Christina Mangurian, Lilly Marks, Carolyn C Meltzer, Barbara Overholser, Julie K Silver and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Error in Author Affiliations.JAMA network open · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Maya S IyerDepartment of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus.
Carol BradfordDepartment of Otolaryngology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus.
Amy S GottliebDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
David B KlingDivision of Emergency Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio.
Reshma JagsiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Christina MangurianDepartment of Psychiatric and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco.
Lilly MarksUniversity of Colorado and Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado.
Carolyn C MeltzerDepartment of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Barbara OverholserExecutive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM) Program, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Julie K SilverDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
David P WayDepartment of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus.
Nancy D SpectorExecutive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM) Program, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Women account for only 28% of current US medical school deans. Studying the differences between women and men in their preparation to becoming deans might help to explain this discrepancy. Objective: To identify differences in the leadership development experiences between women and men in their ascent to the medical school deanship. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, volunteers from the roster of the Association of American Medical Colleges Council of Deans were solicited and interviewed from June 15 to November 9, 2023. Women deans were recruited first, then men who had been appointed to their deanships at a similar time to their women counterparts were recruited. Deans were interviewed on topics related to number of applications for deanships, prior leadership roles, leadership development, personal factors, and career trajectories. Interviews were coded, and themes were extracted through conventional content analysis. Main Outcome and Measures: Career and leadership development experiences were elicited using a semistructured interview guide. Results: We interviewed 17 women and 17 men deans, representing 25.8% (34 of 132) of the total population of US medical school deans. Most deans (23 [67.6%]) practiced a medicine-based specialty or subspecialty. No statistically significant differences were found between women and men with regard to years to attain deanship (mean [SD], 2.7 [3.4] vs 3.7 [3.7] years), years as a dean (mean [SD], 5.7 [5.2] vs 6.0 [5.0] years), highest salary during career (mean [SD], $525 769 [$199 936] vs $416 923 [$195 848]), or medical school rankings (mean [SD], 315.5 [394.5] vs 480.5 [448.9]). Their reports indicated substantive gender differences in their paths to becoming a dean. Compared with men, women deans reported having to work harder to advance, while receiving less support and opportunities for leadership positions by their own institutions. Subsequently, women sought leadership development from external programs. Women deans also experienced gender bias when working with search firms. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study of US medical school deans found that compared with men, women needed to be more proactive, had to participate in external leadership development programs, and had to confront biases during the search process. For rising women leaders, this lack of support had consequences, such as burnout and attrition, potentially affecting the makeup of future generations of medical school deans. Institutional initiatives centering on leadership development of women is needed to mitigate the gender biases and barriers faced by aspiring women leaders.

Indexed as

Faculty, MedicalLeadershipSchools, MedicalAdultCareer MobilityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSex FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID38967920
PMCPMC11227086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.