ArticleAnatolian journal of cardiology2025
Women's Representation in Interventional Cardiology and Other Interventional Fields: Opportunities and Challenges.
Article in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGender disparities persist in procedure-intensive fields (interventional cardiology (IC), interventional radiology (IR), and interventional gastroenterology (IG)). Despite increasing gender balance in some medical specialties, interventional branches remain male-dominated, potentially limiting women's advancement. This study aimed to identify barriers, opportunities, and the impact of gender-based differences on practicing physicians in IC, IR, and IG in Türkiye, with the goal of informing policy and work-place reforms.
methodsThe authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of 338 physicians (50% female) across 3 procedural specialties. Participants answered a 55-item electronic questionnaire that covering demographics, career satisfaction, professional conditions, and experienced challenges. The complete raw dataset is provided via an online link.
resultsA total of 338 physicians from three procedural specialties responded (50% female overall). Women reported lower incomes, fewer mentorship opportunities, and more frequent workplace discrimination. Whereas men frequently cited "wage suppression" and "long hours" as deterrents, women underscored concerns about radiation exposure, emergency workloads, and gender bias. Although scientific productivity measures (e.g., publications) did not differ by gender, female respondents reported higher rates of emotional harassment and scheduling barriers (taking fewer annual leave days or attending fewer scientific events).
conclusionWomen's underrepresentation in interventional fields reflects systemic barriers, including perceived or real discrimination, physical demands, and limited structural support. Addressing these barriers, long or unpredictable work hours, radiation concerns, and workplace bias may foster a more inclusive environment. Institutional-level reforms and policy changes are essential to bridging gender gaps and improving retention in these critical specialties.
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.