New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Women Lag Men in Medical School Professor Jobs

Even though women now make up half of all U.S. medical school graduates, they remain much less likely than men to get research funding or become professors in medicine, two studies suggest

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Lisa Rapaport

(Reuters Health) - Even though women now make up half of all U.S. medical school graduates, they remain much less likely than men to get research funding or become professors in medicine, two studies suggest.

Nationwide, men outnumbered women on U.S. medical school faculties by two to one last year, and men edged out women by almost five to one in achieving senior posts as full professors, according to one of the studies published September 15 in JAMA.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Women also appear to receive far less financial support for biomedical research early in their academic careers, a separate study of applications to one New England foundation suggests.

The studies serve as a reminder that the potential of women in medicine, like their peers in many other professions, has not been fully realized, Dr. Carrie Bylington of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City argues in an accompanying editorial. To represent the diverse communities they serve, academic medical centers should champion diversity among their students, faculty and staff, she writes.

"At least two major roadblocks lead to gender disparities in academic medicine," said Dr. Anupam Jena, a health policy researcher at Harvard Medical School in Boston.

"First, institutional resources, mentorship and biases generally favor men over women, hence making it harder for women in academic medicine to be as productive in research," Jena, lead author of the study of medical school faculties, said by email.

"Second, even when men and women are equally productive - at least measured by publications, NIH grants, years of experience and clinical trials - there are still sex differences in promotions," Jena added.

To evaluate the gender divide for medical school faculty, Jena and colleagues reviewed data on roughly 30,000 female and 61,000 male professors, representing about 9% of doctors nationwide.

 

Among their ranks, about 3,600 women and 17,000 men were full professors, posts that typically come with more leadership opportunities and higher salaries than junior faculty positions.

 

Female faculty members were also less likely to receive grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and run clinical trials recorded in the U.S. registry for research studies.

Women also lagged men in published research, the study found.

One limitation of the study is that it lacked data needed to explore whether more women might have opted for clinical faculty positions that may be less likely than research-oriented posts to lead to full professorships, the authors acknowledge. Researchers may have also had incomplete data on published research, particularly for people who changed their names mid-career due to marriage, the authors note.

A separate study in JAMA today took a closer look at the gender gap in biomedical research funding by reviewing grant applications to one foundation, Health Resources in Action in Boston, from 219 junior faculty members.

Men in the study typically reported having more than twice as much funding from their employers to purchase equipment and set up their labs - half the men received at least $889,000 compared with a median for women of just $350,000.

Forty percent of men received more than $1,000,000 to launch their research efforts, compared to only 12% of women.

While the study is small, and only covers applications from people at 55 institutions, it likely highlights a widespread problem that merits more analysis on a larger scale, said lead author Dr. Robert Sege, vice president of Health Resources in Action.

The study is one of the first to look at the institutional support that scientists get at the beginning of their career. "They need support to buy microscopes or DNA sequencers, they need lab space, they need technicians," Sege said.

The unequal allocation of early career resources may contribute to fewer women rising through the ranks to become full professors, noted Bylington.

"The result of this failure to progress is that we have fewer women in leadership roles and fewer women to serve as mentors to the next generation of physician scientists," she said by email.

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1Y8iHQ0, http://bit.ly/1KQlRnN and http://bit.ly/1Y8mUmT

JAMA 2015.

 

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe