4.6 Article

A narrative celebrating the recent contributions of women to colorectal surgery

Journal

SURGERY
Volume 168, Issue 3, Pages 355-362

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.06.024

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: To interview extraordinary women who have made recent significant contributions to the field of colorectal surgery. Design: The authors asked some of the many extraordinary women who have made significant contributions to the field of colorectal surgery to answer several questions. These women were selected from many potential candidates based upon their extraordinary recent contributions to the field of colorectal surgery. These thought leaders were asked about their contributions to colorectal surgery, their mentors, whether they had any women as role models, and, lastly, what they would tell their younger selves. The study was structured to recognize these women for their remarkable recent contributions to colorectal surgery, and we wished to encourage women to pursue leadership in colorectal surgery including the allied fields of colorectal pathology and colorectal imaging. Furthermore, the authors hoped to inspire male colorectal surgeons to actively mentor and help the career development of women colorectal surgeons. The potential limitations of the study include the fact that there are many more well-deserving women who could have been included in the sample survey but, because of space constraints, were not invited. Conclusion: Women in colorectal surgery and in the allied specialties of colorectal pathology and colorectal radiology have made many recent major significant contributions to colorectal surgery. The expectation is that the volume and frequency of such contributions as well as the number of women making these contributions should further significantly increase with time. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available