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}
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.
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.