A. R. Wilcox1,2, S. L. Wong1,2 1Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center,Department Of Surgery,Lebanon, NH, USA 2Dartmouth Medical School,Lebanon, NH, USA
Introduction: A growing body of data demonstrates persistent disparities in gender representation at scientific and medical meetings. It is also well established that women are underrepresented in positions of highest academic achievement in surgery. As visibility and active participation at national meetings contribute to career advancement, it is important to understand the gender parity of national surgical meetings. Our objective was to evaluate trends in the proportion of women panelists and moderators at the Academic Surgical Congress (ASC) meetings.
Methods: This was a retrospective analysis for which we manually extracted data from the ASC meeting programs for 2014-2018, which are publicly available on the meeting website. We performed an internet search of surgeons listed in the program to determine gender. We then performed counts and calculated proportions of surgeons by gender who were listed as panelists and moderators (including moderators for all oral, plenary, poster, and panel sessions). We also compiled data on the Association for Academic Surgery (AAS) and Society of University Surgeons (SUS), focusing on the composition of the ASC Program Committee, which is comprised of members of the AAS Program Committee and SUS Publications Committee.
Results: 20% of panels (12/59) at the ASC over the past 5 years did not include a woman panelist. 2016 was the most unequal year, as 55% of panels (6/11) did not include a woman panelist at all and only 23% of panelists overall (9/39) were women. In contrast, all panels in 2017 included at least 1 woman panelist. In 2018, although there were 2 panels without a woman, the proportion of woman panelists overall was 43% (24/56). (FIGURE)
Over the 5 years studied, 30% of moderators were women (280/945). 2016 had the lowest representation of women moderators at 25% (43/172). In turn, the Program Committee had the lowest representation of women in 2015 & 2016 (13/58 & 13/59, respectively, or just 22%). Interestingly, in 2016 both of the Program Committee chairs were men, whereas there was 1 man and 1 woman in each of the remaining four years analyzed. Women comprised 30% of the Program Committee in 2017 (17/57) and 29% in 2018 (19/65).
Conclusion: In the past 5 years, and most notably in 2016, women were underrepresented compared to men as panelists and moderators at ASC meetings. The lowest proportion of women on the Program Committee (including chairs) was seen in 2016, which is consistent with trends in the literature showing that representation of women on program committees correlates to the proportion of women speakers at meetings. However, there has been evidence of growing equity in the past 2 years, possibly reflective of increasing awareness of these disparities.
