The status of academic interventional radiologists in Germany with focus on gender disparity: how can we do better?

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftForschungsartikelBeigetragenBegutachtung

Beitragende

  • Sophia Freya Ulrike Blum - , Institut und Poliklinik für diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie (Erstautor:in)
  • Cornelia Lieselotte Angelika Dewald - , Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH) (Autor:in)
  • Lena Becker - , Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH) (Autor:in)
  • Emona Staudacher - , Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (Autor:in)
  • Mareike Franke - , Luzerner Kantonsspital (Autor:in)
  • Marcus Katoh - , Helios Klinikum Krefeld (Autor:in)
  • Ralf Thorsten Hoffmann - , Institut und Poliklinik für diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie (Autor:in)
  • Stefan Rohde - , Klinikum Dortmund gGmbH (Autor:in)
  • Philip Marius Paprottka - , Technische Universität München (Autor:in)
  • Frank Wacker - , Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH) (Autor:in)
  • Kerstin Westphalen - , DRK Kliniken Berlin Köpenick (Autor:in)
  • Philipp Bruners - , Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (Autor:in)
  • Bernhard Gebauer - , Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Autor:in)
  • Marco Das - , Helios Klinikum Duisburg (Autor:in)
  • Wibke Uller - , Universitätsklinikum Freiburg (Autor:in)

Abstract

Purpose: The aim was to characterize the framework conditions in academic interventional radiology (IR) in Germany with focus on differences between genders. Materials and methods: After IRB approval, all members of The German Society for Interventional Radiology and Minimally Invasive Therapy (n = 1,632) were invited to an online survey on work and research. Statistical comparisons were undertaken with the Fisher’s exact test, Wilcoxon rank sum test or Pearson’s Chi-squared test. Results: From 267 available questionnaires (general response rate 16.4%), 200 were fully completed. 40% of these (78/200) were involved in research (71% men vs. 29% women, p < 0.01) and eligible for further analysis. Of these, 6% worked part-time (2% vs. 17%, p < 0.05). 90% of the respondents spent less than 25% of their research during their paid working hours, and 41% performed more than 75% of their research during. leisure time. 28% received exemption for research. 88% were (rather) satisfied with their career. One in two participants successfully applied for funding, with higher success rates among male applicants (90% vs. 75%) and respondents with protected research time (93% vs. 80%). Compared to men, women rated their entrance in research as harder (p < 0.05), their research career as more important (p < 0.05), felt less noticed at congresses (93% vs. 53%, p < 0.01), less confident (98% vs. 71%, p < 0.01), and not well connected (77% vs. 36%, p < 0.01). Conclusion: Women and men did research under the same circumstances; however, women were underrepresented. Future programs should generally focus on protected research time and gather female mentors to advance academic IR in Germany.

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Aufsatznummer47
FachzeitschriftCVIR endovascular
Jahrgang7
Ausgabenummer1
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - Dez. 2024
Peer-Review-StatusJa

Externe IDs

ORCID /0000-0001-7096-5199/work/171553757

Schlagworte

Schlagwörter

  • Academic IR, Gender disparity, Interventional radiology, IR research