3.8 Article

National Trends of Gender Disparity in Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guideline Authors, 2001-2020

Journal

CJC OPEN
Volume 3, Issue 12, Pages S12-S18

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2021.04.003

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study revealed a persistent gender disparity in the representation of women authors in Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines, with no significant change over the past two decades. Women were less frequently included as authors compared to men, especially in various subspecialties of cardiology and leadership roles. Efforts are needed to promote gender equality and increase women's participation in leadership positions within the field of cardiology.
Background: The level of representation of women in cardiology remains low compared to that of men, particularly in leadership positions. We evaluated gender disparity in the authorship of Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) guidelines. Methods: All CCS guidelines from 2001-2020 were identified. Gender was assessed based on pronoun use in the biographies and social media of the authors. Only primary panel authors were included in our analysis. Stratified analyses were performed based on subspecialties. Results: A total of 76 guidelines were identified, with 1172 authors (26% women, 74% men, P < 0.0001), with no significant change in percentage of women authors over 2 decades, (37.1% in 2001, 36.3% in 2020, P = 0.34). Inclusion of women as authors occurred less frequently than inclusion of men in general cardiology guidelines (20.1% vs 79.9%, P < 0.0001) and all subspecialties-heart failure (36.4% vs 63.6%, P < 0.0001), interventional cardiology (12.6% vs 87.4%, P < 0.0001), electrophysiology (20.2% vs 79.8%, P < 0.0001), and pediatric cardiology (41.7% vs 58.3%, P = 0.02). It was less likely for women to be a chair or cochair of a guideline writing committee, compared with men (20.1% vs 79.8%, P < 0.0001). There were 609 unique authors (25.6% women, 74.4% men, P < 0.0001), 542 unique medical doctorate (MD) authors (20.7% women, 79.3% men, P < 0.0001), and 67 unique non-MD authors (65.7% women, 34.3% men, P = 0.0003). Conclusions: There is a persistent shortfall in the inclusion of women authors for CCS guidelines, which has not changed over time. Further efforts are required to promote women's inclusion in leadership roles, which may lead to authorship of the guidelines.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available