(618) Gender representation in MFM fellowship leadership: A cross-sectional analysis

Thursday, January 30, 2025

4:00 PM – 6:00 PM

Submitting Author and Presenting Author(s)

Sally Kuehn, BS (she/her/hers)

Medical Student
Duke University School of Medicine
Durham, NC, United States

Coauthor(s)

Colleen P. Judge-Golden, MD, PhD (she/her/hers)

Resident Physician
Duke University Hospital
Durham, North Carolina, United States
Rachel L. Wood, MD (she/her/hers)

Assistant Professor
Duke University
Durham, North Carolina, United States
Sarah K. Dotters-Katz, MD

Associate Professor
Duke University School of Medicine
Durham, North Carolina, United States

Objective: Women hold far fewer leadership positions in academic medicine than men. The purpose of this study was to describe the gender breakdown of maternal fetal medicine(MFM) fellowship program directors(PD) and to evaluate the association between gender and academic rank in this cohort.

Study Design: After IRB exemption, an inclusive list of active MFM fellowship programs was collected. Using online search tools, PD gender identity (extrapolated from written pronouns in online profiles), PD academic rank, number of years since PD fellowship graduation, and number and gender identity of current fellows were collected for each program. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses.

Results: Biographical information was available for 104 of 106(98.1%) MFM fellowship PDs and 387 fellows representing 88 programs. Of the fellowship PDs, 63(61%) were women. On average, male directors had spent significantly more years out of fellowship than their female counterparts (21.0 yrs vs 15.1 yrs, p=0.004) and were more likely to be full professors (54% vs. 30%, p=0.03). However, when stratifying by number of years in practice (< 10 years, 10-19 years, 20+ years), no difference in academic rank was seen between men and women within groups (Figure). Of fellows, 87(22.5%) were men. The proportion of male PDs was significantly higher than the proportion of male fellows (39% vs. 23%, p=0.0008). There was no association between fellow gender identity and the gender identity of their respective PDs (Table).

Conclusion: Even in OBGYN—one of the few predominantly female specialties—gender disparities still exist in medical education leadership. In MFM, males are overrepresented in fellowship leadership compared to the gender distribution of current fellows. Our data suggest that this finding, and the difference in academic rank between male and female PDs, is related to males having been in practice for longer. As the specialty continues to evolve, attention must be paid to ensure that medical education leadership is reflective of the trainees it serves.