Open Access

ARTICLE

Gender differences in promotions and scholarly productivity in academic urology

Mohannad A. Awad^1,2, Thomas W. Gaither¹, E. Charles Osterberg^1,3, Glen Yang⁴, Kirsten L. Greene¹, Dana A. Weiss⁵, Jennifer T. Anger⁶, Benjamin N. Breyer^1,7

1 Department of Urology, University of California – San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
2 Department of Surgery, King Abdulaziz University, Rabigh, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Urology, Dell Medical School, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA
4 Department of Urology, Carle Foundation Hospital, Urbana, Illinois, USA
5 Division of Urology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
6 Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
7 Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of California – San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
Address correspondence to Dr. Mohannad A. Awad, Department of Urology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco General Hospital, 1001 Potrero Ave, Suite 3A20, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA

Canadian Journal of Urology 2017, 24(5), 9011-9016.

Abstract

Introduction: The gender demographics within urology are changing as more women are entering the workforce. Since research productivity strongly influence career advancement, we aim to characterize gender differences in scholarly productivity and promotions in a cohort of graduated academic urologists.
Materials and methods: Urologists who graduated between 2002 and 2008 from 34 residency programs affiliated with the top 50 urology hospitals as ranked in 2009 by U.S. News & World Report were followed longitudinally. Only urologists affiliated with an academic teaching hospital were included for analysis.
Results: A total of 543 residents graduated, 459 (84.5%) males and 84 (15.5%) females. Of these, 173 entered academia, 137 (79.2%) males and 36 (20.8%) females. Women had fewer publications compared to men (mean 19.3 versus 61.7, p = 0.001). Fewer women compared to men were promoted from assistant professor 11 (30.6%) versus 83 (60.6%), p = 0.005. Fewer women achieved associate professor 10 (27.8%) versus 67 (48.9%), p = 0.005 or professor ranks 1 (2.8%) versus 16 (11.7%), p = 0.005 respectively compared to men. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, after controlling for the number of total publications and number of years since graduation, gender was not predictive of achieving promotion, OR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.31-2.13), p = 0.673.
Conclusions: Women are underrepresented in senior faculty roles in urology. Scholarly productivity seems to play a major role in academic promotion within urology. With increasing women in academic urology, further studies are needed to explore predictors of promotion and how women can achieve higher leadership roles in the field.

---

Keywords

---