AAPM年会中的性别多样性:2017年演讲者和主持人的基准分析。

IF 6.5 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Andrea Roso-Mares, Sara St James, Ashley Cetnar, Julianne Pollard-Larkin, Reshma Jagsi, Suzanne B Evans, Jean M Moran, Laura I Cerviño
{"title":"AAPM年会中的性别多样性:2017年演讲者和主持人的基准分析。","authors":"Andrea Roso-Mares, Sara St James, Ashley Cetnar, Julianne Pollard-Larkin, Reshma Jagsi, Suzanne B Evans, Jean M Moran, Laura I Cerviño","doi":"10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.08.067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study assesses gender composition among invitees at the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) annual meeting.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting. Gender was determined using AAPM member public profiles and data. Statistical analysis of gender representation was performed using the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test, with a p-value <0.05 considered significant. Speaker and moderator characteristics, including academic impact metrics (h-index, m-index, and publication history), were analyzed. Gender representation for 2012 and 2021 was also calculated to provide a comparative reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2017, women comprised 25% of invited speakers and 19.9% of moderators, while AAPM membership was 23% women. A significant gender difference was observed in h-index values (median: men 18, women 13; p=0.003), but no significant differences were found in presenter evaluation scores. Only 30 states were represented among the invitees, highlighting the need for improved geographic diversity. As a secondary analysis, gender representation among invitees was found to have increased from 17% in 2012 to 25% in 2017 and 39% in 2021.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gender disparities in speaker selection persisted at the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting, with women underrepresented among both invited speakers and moderators relative to gender parity. While no gender-based differences were observed in presenter evaluations, disparities in academic impact metrics highlight structural challenges in achieving equal representation. These findings provide a baseline for evaluating future initiatives within AAPM, with secondary data suggesting positive trends over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":14215,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender Diversity in the AAPM Annual Meeting: A 2017 Benchmark Analysis of Speakers and Moderators.\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Roso-Mares, Sara St James, Ashley Cetnar, Julianne Pollard-Larkin, Reshma Jagsi, Suzanne B Evans, Jean M Moran, Laura I Cerviño\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.08.067\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study assesses gender composition among invitees at the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) annual meeting.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting. Gender was determined using AAPM member public profiles and data. Statistical analysis of gender representation was performed using the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test, with a p-value <0.05 considered significant. Speaker and moderator characteristics, including academic impact metrics (h-index, m-index, and publication history), were analyzed. Gender representation for 2012 and 2021 was also calculated to provide a comparative reference.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 2017, women comprised 25% of invited speakers and 19.9% of moderators, while AAPM membership was 23% women. A significant gender difference was observed in h-index values (median: men 18, women 13; p=0.003), but no significant differences were found in presenter evaluation scores. Only 30 states were represented among the invitees, highlighting the need for improved geographic diversity. As a secondary analysis, gender representation among invitees was found to have increased from 17% in 2012 to 25% in 2017 and 39% in 2021.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Gender disparities in speaker selection persisted at the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting, with women underrepresented among both invited speakers and moderators relative to gender parity. While no gender-based differences were observed in presenter evaluations, disparities in academic impact metrics highlight structural challenges in achieving equal representation. These findings provide a baseline for evaluating future initiatives within AAPM, with secondary data suggesting positive trends over time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.08.067\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2025.08.067","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究评估美国医学物理学家协会(AAPM)年会受邀者的性别构成。方法和材料:采用2017年AAPM年会的数据进行横断面分析。性别是根据AAPM成员的公开资料和数据确定的。使用Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U检验对性别代表性进行统计分析,p值结果:2017年,女性占受邀演讲者的25%,占主持人的19.9%,而AAPM会员中女性占23%。在h-指数值上观察到显著的性别差异(中位数:男性18,女性13;p=0.003),但在推荐人评价得分上没有发现显著差异。受邀者中只有30个州的代表,这突出了改善地理多样性的必要性。作为二次分析,被邀请者中的性别代表性从2012年的17%增加到2017年的25%和2021年的39%。结论:在2017年AAPM年会上,演讲者选择中的性别差异仍然存在,相对于性别平等,女性在受邀演讲者和主持人中的比例都不足。虽然在演讲者评估中没有观察到基于性别的差异,但学术影响指标的差异突出了实现平等代表性的结构性挑战。这些发现为评估AAPM内部未来的举措提供了基线,辅助数据显示了随着时间的推移的积极趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gender Diversity in the AAPM Annual Meeting: A 2017 Benchmark Analysis of Speakers and Moderators.

Purpose: This study assesses gender composition among invitees at the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) annual meeting.

Methods and materials: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting. Gender was determined using AAPM member public profiles and data. Statistical analysis of gender representation was performed using the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test, with a p-value <0.05 considered significant. Speaker and moderator characteristics, including academic impact metrics (h-index, m-index, and publication history), were analyzed. Gender representation for 2012 and 2021 was also calculated to provide a comparative reference.

Results: In 2017, women comprised 25% of invited speakers and 19.9% of moderators, while AAPM membership was 23% women. A significant gender difference was observed in h-index values (median: men 18, women 13; p=0.003), but no significant differences were found in presenter evaluation scores. Only 30 states were represented among the invitees, highlighting the need for improved geographic diversity. As a secondary analysis, gender representation among invitees was found to have increased from 17% in 2012 to 25% in 2017 and 39% in 2021.

Conclusion: Gender disparities in speaker selection persisted at the 2017 AAPM Annual Meeting, with women underrepresented among both invited speakers and moderators relative to gender parity. While no gender-based differences were observed in presenter evaluations, disparities in academic impact metrics highlight structural challenges in achieving equal representation. These findings provide a baseline for evaluating future initiatives within AAPM, with secondary data suggesting positive trends over time.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
2538
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics (IJROBP), known in the field as the Red Journal, publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to radiation oncology, radiation biology, medical physics, and both education and health policy as it relates to the field. This journal has a particular interest in original contributions of the following types: prospective clinical trials, outcomes research, and large database interrogation. In addition, it seeks reports of high-impact innovations in single or combined modality treatment, tumor sensitization, normal tissue protection (including both precision avoidance and pharmacologic means), brachytherapy, particle irradiation, and cancer imaging. Technical advances related to dosimetry and conformal radiation treatment planning are of interest, as are basic science studies investigating tumor physiology and the molecular biology underlying cancer and normal tissue radiation response.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信