Matching Against Men: 5 Years of Residency Match Data Show Disparities Still Exist.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ashley Mason, Zeegan George, K. Khatskevich, Xiaoxiao Gao, Kira K. Zwygart, Danielle Gulick
{"title":"Matching Against Men: 5 Years of Residency Match Data Show Disparities Still Exist.","authors":"Ashley Mason, Zeegan George, K. Khatskevich, Xiaoxiao Gao, Kira K. Zwygart, Danielle Gulick","doi":"10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES\nDespite progress toward equal representation by sex in medical practice, women remain underrepresented in many specialties. This study sought to examine the current state of gender equality among recently graduated doctors in multiple specialties.\n\n\nMETHODS\nDeidentified demographics, standardized examination scores, and Match results were gathered for 829 graduates. Participants were selected from an allopathic medical school between 2016 and 2020. Nineteen students (2.29%) were excluded from the study. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and χ2 tests for independence were used to compare proportions between reported sex and specialty and program Match results. One-way analysis of variance was then performed to test for differences in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores between sexes. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf the 829 individuals studied, 44.6% were women. A significantly smaller proportion of women matched into the most competitive specialties, despite no significant difference in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores between sexes. Furthermore, there was an overall significant trend of women matching into more competitive programs for any given specialty.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nIn this study, we found that men matched into more highly competitive specialties, whereas women matched into more competitive residency program locations. Further research is needed to determine why women matched into specific specialties at lower rates than their male peers and seek to understand how sex affects the narrative of specialty choice.","PeriodicalId":22043,"journal":{"name":"Southern Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001673","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Despite progress toward equal representation by sex in medical practice, women remain underrepresented in many specialties. This study sought to examine the current state of gender equality among recently graduated doctors in multiple specialties. METHODS Deidentified demographics, standardized examination scores, and Match results were gathered for 829 graduates. Participants were selected from an allopathic medical school between 2016 and 2020. Nineteen students (2.29%) were excluded from the study. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and χ2 tests for independence were used to compare proportions between reported sex and specialty and program Match results. One-way analysis of variance was then performed to test for differences in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores between sexes. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Of the 829 individuals studied, 44.6% were women. A significantly smaller proportion of women matched into the most competitive specialties, despite no significant difference in US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores between sexes. Furthermore, there was an overall significant trend of women matching into more competitive programs for any given specialty. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we found that men matched into more highly competitive specialties, whereas women matched into more competitive residency program locations. Further research is needed to determine why women matched into specific specialties at lower rates than their male peers and seek to understand how sex affects the narrative of specialty choice.
针对男性的匹配:5 年的住院医生匹配数据显示差异依然存在。
目的尽管在实现医疗实践中的性别平等方面取得了进展,但女性在许多专业中的代表性仍然不足。方法收集了 829 名毕业生的人口统计学特征、标准化考试成绩和比赛结果。参与者选自 2016 年至 2020 年间的一所对抗疗法医学院。研究中排除了 19 名学生(2.29%)。研究人员计算了描述性统计数字,并使用χ2独立性检验比较了报告性别与专业和课程匹配结果之间的比例。然后进行单因素方差分析,检验不同性别在美国医学执业资格考试步骤 1 和步骤 2 分数上的差异。结果 在研究的 829 人中,44.6% 为女性。尽管不同性别在美国医学执照考试步骤 1 分数上没有明显差异,但进入竞争最激烈专业的女性比例明显较低。结论 在这项研究中,我们发现男性匹配到竞争更激烈的专业,而女性匹配到竞争更激烈的住院医师培训项目地点。还需要进一步的研究来确定为什么女性进入特定专业的匹配率低于男性,并试图了解性别如何影响专业选择的叙述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Southern Medical Journal
Southern Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
222
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the Birmingham, Alabama-based Southern Medical Association (SMA), the Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) has for more than 100 years provided the latest clinical information in areas that affect patients'' daily lives. Now delivered to individuals exclusively online, the SMJ has a multidisciplinary focus that covers a broad range of topics relevant to physicians and other healthcare specialists in all relevant aspects of the profession, including medicine and medical specialties, surgery and surgery specialties; child and maternal health; mental health; emergency and disaster medicine; public health and environmental medicine; bioethics and medical education; and quality health care, patient safety, and best practices. Each month, articles span the spectrum of medical topics, providing timely, up-to-the-minute information for both primary care physicians and specialists. Contributors include leaders in the healthcare field from across the country and around the world. The SMJ enables physicians to provide the best possible care to patients in this age of rapidly changing modern medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信