Dataset Information

Gender-based salary differences in academic medicine: a retrospective review of data from six public medical centers in the Western USA.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

We assessed the effect of gender, rank and research productivity on compensation for faculty at academic medical centres.

Design

A web-based retrospective review of salary for professors in 2016.

Setting

Faculty from six state-run, publicly funded academic medical centres in the Western USA.

Participants

799 faculty members, 225 assistant (51% women), 200 associate (40% women) and 374 full professors (32% women) from general surgery (26% women), obstetrics and gynaecology (70% women) and radiology (34% women).

Methods

Archived online faculty profiles were reviewed for gender, rank and compensation (total, baseline and supplemental). Total compensation was defined as baseline compensation plus supplemental income. Baseline compensation was defined as base salary minus reductions due to participation in the voluntary Employee Reduction in Time and phased retirement programmes. Supplemental income was defined as additional salary for clinical care and research (eg, grants). Elsevier's Scopus was used to collect data on h-index, a measure of research productivity. Linear regression models were estimated to determine the relationship between these factors and salary.

Results

Total compensation was significantly higher for men across all professorial ranks in both general surgery [Formula: see text] and obstetrics and gynaecology [Formula: see text]. Women faculty members within these departments earned almost US$75 000 less than their men colleagues. The disparity in salary originates from gaps in supplemental income, as baseline compensation was not significantly different between men and women. No significant gender difference in total compensation for radiology was found [Formula: see text]. Higher h-index was associated with higher baseline compensation across all departments as well as with supplemental income for general surgery. Higher h-index was related to lower supplemental income for radiology and was not related to supplemental income for obstetrics and gynaecology.

Conclusions

Further investigations should focus on discrepancies in supplemental income, which may preferentially benefit men.

SUBMITTER: Miller H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8991058 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gender-based salary differences in academic medicine: a retrospective review of data from six public medical centers in the Western USA.

Miller Hayley H Seckel Elizabeth E White Chrislyn L CL Sanchez Diana D Rubesova Erika E Mueller Claudia C Bianco Katherine K

BMJ open 20220407 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>We assessed the effect of gender, rank and research productivity on compensation for faculty at academic medical centres.<h4>Design</h4>A web-based retrospective review of salary for professors in 2016.<h4>Setting</h4>Faculty from six state-run, publicly funded academic medical centres in the Western USA.<h4>Participants</h4>799 faculty members, 225 assistant (51% women), 200 associate (40% women) and 374 full professors (32% women) from general surgery (26% women), obstetrics ...[more]

PMID: 35393330

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceLimited evidence exists on salary differences between male and female academic physicians, largely owing to difficulty obtaining data on salary and factors influencing salary. Existing studies have been limited by reliance on survey-based approaches to measuring sex differences in earnings, lack of contemporary data, small sample sizes, or limited geographic representation.ObjectiveTo analyze sex differences in earnings among US academic physicians.Design, setting, and participantsFreedom of Information laws mandate release of salary information of public university employees in several states. In 12 states with salary information published online, salary data were extracted on 10 241 academic physicians at 24 public medical schools. These data were linked to a unique physician database with detailed information on sex, age, years of experience, faculty rank, specialty, scientific authorship, National Institutes of Health funding, clinical trial participation, and Medicare reimbursements (proxy for clinical revenue). Sex differences in salary were estimated after adjusting for these factors.ExposuresPhysician sex.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual salary.ResultsAmong 10 241 physicians, female physicians (n = 3549) had lower mean (SD) unadjusted salaries than male physicians ($206 641 [$88 238] vs $257 957 [$137 202]; absolute difference, $51 315 [95% CI, $46 330-$56 301]). Sex differences persisted after multivariable adjustment ($227 783 [95% CI, $224 117-$231 448] vs $247 661 [95% CI, $245 065-$250 258] with an absolute difference of $19 878 [95% CI, $15 261-$24 495]). Sex differences in salary varied across specialties, institutions, and faculty ranks. For example, adjusted salaries of female full professors ($250 971 [95% CI, $242 307-$259 635]) were comparable to those of male associate professors ($247 212 [95% CI, $241 850-$252 575]). Among specialties, adjusted salaries were highest in orthopedic surgery ($358 093 [95% CI, $344 354-$371 831]), surgical subspecialties ($318 760 [95% CI, $311 030-$326 491]), and general surgery ($302 666 [95% CI, $294 060-$311 272]) and lowest in infectious disease, family medicine, and neurology (mean income, <$200 000). Years of experience, total publications, clinical trial participation, and Medicare payments were positively associated with salary.Conclusions and relevanceAmong physicians with faculty appointments at 24 US public medical schools, significant sex differences in salary exist even after accounting for age, experience, specialty, faculty rank, and measures of research productivity and clinical revenue.

Project description:ImportancePoor retention may be associated with lack of faculty diversity in academic medicine.ObjectiveTo examine differences in faculty retention by gender, degree type, and race and ethnicity using data from US medical schools.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study analyzed data from 155 medical schools for 1978 to 2021, which were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Retention rates were calculated by gender, race and ethnicity, and degree type. Time to attrition was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the differences in retention by gender and race. Data were analyzed from March 2021 to November 2022.Main outcomes and measuresThe duration of continuous employment in academic medicine and variations in retention based on gender, race, ethnicity, and terminal degree.ResultsAmong 390 766 faculty members (232 829 [59.6%] men; 1190 American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander [0.3%]; 72 490 Asian [18.6%]; 14 920 Black [3.8%]; 20 345 Hispanic, Latino, of Spanish origin, or multirace Hispanic [5.2%]; 251 670 non-Hispanic White [64.4%] participants; and 30 151 [7.7%] other race), 259 628 (66.4%) had MD or MD-equivalent terminal degrees. Women left academic medicine a median of 1 year earlier (median retention, 8.33 years; 95% CI, 8.18-8.41 years) than men (median retention, 9.35 years; 95% CI, 9.25-9.42 years). Compared with White faculty (median retention, 9.91 years; 95% CI, 9.83-9.92 years), multiracial and faculty of other races had the lowest retention (median retention, 5.42 years; 95% CI, 5.33-5.55 years), followed by Alaska Native, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (median retention, 6.00 years; 95% CI, 5.62-6.62 years), Black (median retention, 7.78 years; 95% CI, 7.50-8.00 years), Asian (median retention, 8.00 years; 95% CI, 8.00-8.11 years) and Hispanic faculty (median retention, 9.00 years; 95% CI, 8.75-9.16 years). Women faculty in the 1970s were 20% more likely than men to leave academia, whereas women in the 2010s had no greater risk of leaving, mainly due to a decline in retention of men.Conclusions and relevanceGender differences in faculty retention have decreased in the most recent decade; however, men had lower retention compared with earlier cohorts. In this study, faculty who were underrepresented in medicine left academic medicine a median of 1 to 4 years earlier than White faculty. Greater attrition among men and women for recent cohorts suggests that enhanced retention efforts are imperative to maintain an experienced and diverse faculty.

Project description:BackgroundAcademic Medical Centers (AMCs) must simultaneously serve different purposes: Delivery of high quality healthcare services to patients, as the main mission, supported by other core missions such as academic activities, i.e., researching, teaching and tutoring, while maintaining solvency. This study aims to develop a methodology for constructing models evaluating the academic value provided by AMCs and implementing it at the largest AMC in Israel.MethodsThirty five practiced educators and researchers, academic experts, faculty members and executives, all employed by a metropolitan 1500-bed AMC, were involved in developing academic quality indicators. First, an initial list of AMCs' academic quality indicators was drafted, using a literature review and consulting scholars. Afterwards, additional data and preferences were collected by conducting semi-structured interviews, complemented by a three-round Delphi Panel. Finally, the methodology for constructing a model evaluating the academic value provided by the AMC was developed.ResultsThe composite academic quality indicators methodology consists of nine indicators (relative weight in parentheses): 'Scientific Publications Value' (18.7%), 'Completed Studies' (13.5%), 'Authors Value' (13.0%), 'Residents Quality' (11.3%), 'Competitive Grants Budget' (10.2%), 'Academic Training' (8.7%), 'Academic Positions' (8.3%), 'Number of Studies' (8.3%) and 'Academic Supervision' (8.0%). These indicators were grouped into three core categories: 'Education', 'Research' and 'Publications', having almost the same importance on a scale from zero to one (0-1), i.e., 0.363, 0.320, and 0.317, respectively. The results demonstrated a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach-alpha range: 0.79-0.86).ConclusionsWe have found a gap in the ability to measure academic value provided by AMCs. The main contribution of this research is the development of methodology for constructing evaluation models for AMCs academic performance. Further studies are needed to further test the validity and reliability of the proposed methodology at other sites.

Project description:ImportanceGender-based disparities in compensation in academic medicine are recognized, but their estimated impacts on early career earning potential and strategies to mitigate them have not been well studied.ObjectivesTo compare earning potential between female and male academic physicians in the first 10 years of posttraining employment and to evaluate the estimated impact of promotion timing, starting salary, and salary growth rate on earning potential.Design, setting, and participantsUsing publicly available mean debt and compensation data for full-time employed academic physicians in the US from 2019 to 2020, starting salary, salary in year 10 of employment, annual salary growth rate, and overall earning potential in the first 10 years of employment were estimated for each gender by subspecialty. The estimated impacts of promotion timing and potential interventions, including equalizing starting salaries and annual salary growth rates, were modeled. Data analysis was performed from March to May 2021.ExposuresGender and subspecialty.Main outcomes and measuresStarting salary, annual salary growth rate, year-10 salary, and earning potential in first 10 years of employment.ResultsThis cross-sectional study included compensation data from 24 593 female and 29 886 male academic physicians across 45 subspecialties. Women had lower starting salaries in 42 of 45 subspecialties (93%), year-10 salaries in 43 of 45 subspecialties (96%), mean annual salary growth rates in 22 of 45 subspecialties (49%), and earning potential in 43 of 45 subspecialties (96%) (median [IQR], $214 440 [$130 423-$384 954], or 10%, less). A 1-year delay in promotion from assistant to associate professor reduced women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $26 042 ($19 672-$35 671), but failure to be promoted at all reduced it by a median (IQR) of $218 724 ($176 317-$284 466). Equalizing starting salaries could increase women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $250 075 ($161 299-$381 799) in the subspecialties for which starting salaries for women were lower than those for men. Equalizing annual salary growth rates could increase women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $53 661 ($24 258-$102 892) in the subspecialties for which mean annual salary growth rates were lower for women than for men.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that gender-based disparities in starting salary and early career earning potential are pervasive in academic medicine in the US. Equalizing starting salaries would address the majority of the differences in earning potential.

Dataset Information

Gender-based salary differences in academic medicine: a retrospective review of data from six public medical centers in the Western USA.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Gender-based salary differences in academic medicine: a retrospective review of data from six public medical centers in the Western USA.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets