ArticleJTCVS open2026
Progress without parity: Gender-distribution of cardiothoracic surgical society awards.
Article in JTCVS open, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Cardiothoracic surgery (CTS) remains a men-dominated field where gender equity continues to be a challenge. Despite intentional inclusivity efforts, early-career scholarships from surgical societies have not been systematically evaluated. Because these awards foster mentorship, networking, and academic advancement, we aimed to assess gender distribution trends among recipients to identify disparities and opportunities for improvement. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis using publicly available data from the websites of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS). Award categories included research fellowships, travel scholarships, leadership programs, and career development awards. Gender identification was inferred through institutional and publication profiles and validated. Descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: Between 1950 and 2030, 1879 scholarships were awarded (AATS: 1011; STS: 868). Overall, 75.25% (1414) were awarded to men and 24.75% (465) to women. STS awarded a greater proportion to women (26.3%, 228) compared with AATS (23.4%, 237). AATS research-focused awards showed marked disparity, with women received only 15.3% (17), whereas STS research awards were more gender-balanced (41.5%, 34 women). From 2005 to 2025, women's representation increased in some years, peaking in 2022 at 33.8% (71/210), but remained inconsistent and dropped in the following years. Several years (eg, 2006, 2012) recorded 0% women recipients. Conclusions: Despite progress, gender disparities persist in CTS society scholarships. Research and leadership awards remain men dominated, potentially limiting women's academic progression in CTS. Structured equity audits, transparent selection, and targeted or blinded programs could help close the gap.
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.