ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2026
Work and life satisfaction of female urologists in Korea.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate career satisfaction, mentorship experience, work-life balance, and perceptions of gender discrimination among female urology residents and specialists in Korea. MATERIALS AND
methodsA nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted among female urologists, including residents and board-certified specialists. The questionnaire assessed demographic characteristics, mentorship experience, career satisfaction, personal life satisfaction, work-related stress, and experiences of gender discrimination.
resultsA total of 41 respondents participated, including 11 residents and 30 specialists. Most specialists (63.3%) practiced in tertiary or secondary hospitals, and 21 (70.0%) specialized in female urology or voiding dysfunction. Only 9.1% of residents and 33.3% of specialists reported substantial mentorship during training, with the most common barrier being the absence of experts in the desired field. While 60.0% of specialists and 54.5% of residents stated they would choose urology again, 56.7% and 45.5%, respectively, would not recommend the specialty to their children. Residents reported higher work-related stress (median, 7 vs. 5, p>0.05), whereas personal life satisfaction was similar between groups (median, 6 vs. 7, p>0.05). All residents reported workload adjustments, whereas 95.0% of specialists reported unchanged duties. Approximately one-third experienced gender discrimination, mainly during residency, most often from colleagues or patients, and 81.6% perceived male preference in employment.
conclusionsFemale urologists in Korea demonstrate strong professional dedication but there remain challenges related to mentorship scarcity, gender bias, and work-life imbalance. Efforts to strengthen mentorship and promote equitable workplace policies are essential to enhance satisfaction and retention among women in urology.
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.