Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice

Register      Login

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2023 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Race and Gender Shift among Academic Glaucoma Specialists in the Last 5 Decades

Kasra Afzali, Dylann K Fujimoto, Seyed Omid Mohammadi, Ken Y Lin

Keywords : Drainage devices, Fenestration, Glaucoma, Glaucoma drainage devices, Glaucoma drainage implants, Glaucoma surgery, Surgical technique, Technique

Citation Information : Afzali K, Fujimoto DK, Mohammadi SO, Lin KY. Race and Gender Shift among Academic Glaucoma Specialists in the Last 5 Decades. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2023; 17 (2):98-103.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1407

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 11-07-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Purpose: To evaluate the demographic composition of academic glaucoma specialists currently practicing in the United States. Design: Retrospective and observational study. Subjects: Academic glaucoma specialists identified from ophthalmology residency programs listed on the Doximity database. Methods: The American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) membership directory, Doximity database, publicly available data, and direct communications were used to identify academic glaucoma specialists and their demographics. Information collected included—name, gender, race/ethnicity, geographic location, board certification date, academic affiliation, and academic rank. Ophthalmic age was defined as the number of years since ophthalmology board certification. Underrepresented minority (URM) groups were defined as Hispanics, Black or African Americans, Latinos, American Indians, or Alaskan Natives as defined by San Francisco match. In addition, the temporal, geographic, and academic rank distributions among females and URMs were explored. Main outcome measures: Women and URMs representations among academic glaucoma specialists across academic ranks, geographic regions, as well as ophthalmic age. Results: There were 457 active academic glaucoma specialists identified from 110 institutions in 38 states. Among them, 185 (40.5%) were women and 42 (9.2%) were URM. The proportion of women glaucoma specialists in academia had increased significantly with a rate of 1.049 in odds ratio (OR) per year (p < 0.001). However, there were no significant changes in the proportion of URMs over time. The earliest year of certification was 1,964 for males and 1,974 for females. When controlled for ophthalmic age, there were no significant differences in the distribution of women or URMs between the different academic ranks (p = 0.572 and p = 0.762, respectively). Among assistant professors, women had a significantly higher ophthalmic age compared to men (p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in ophthalmic age in both the associate and full professor groups. There were no significant differences in the geographic distribution of gender (p = 0.516) and URM across United States regions (p = 0.238). Conclusion: The proportion of women among academic glaucoma specialists has significantly increased over the past 5 decades; however, the proportion of URMs has been stagnant in the same period. Enhancing URM representation among academic glaucoma specialists deserves to be a future priority.

  1. Ma A, Sanchez A, Ma M. The impact of patient-provider race/ethnicity concordance on provider visits: updated evidence from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 2019;6(5):1011–1020. DOI: 10.1007/s40615-019-00602-y
  2. Takeshita J, Wang S, Loren AW, et al. Association of racial/ethnic and gender concordance between patients and physicians with patient experience ratings. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3(11):e2024583. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.24583
  3. Jetty A, Jabbarpour Y, Pollack J, et al. Patient-physician racial concordance associated with improved healthcare use and lower healthcare expenditures in minority populations. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 2022;9(1):68–81. DOI: 10.1007/s40615-020-00930-4
  4. Colby SL, Ortman JM. Projections of the size and composition of the U.S. population: 2014 to 2060. Washington, DC; 2014.
  5. Anon. Figure 15. Percentage of full-time U.S. medical school faculty by race/ethnicity. 2018|AAMC.
  6. Wallis CJ, Ravi B, Coburn N, et al. Comparison of postoperative outcomes among patients treated by male and female surgeons: a population based matched cohort study. BMJ 2017;359:j4366. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j4366
  7. Comparison of hospital mortality and readmission rates for Medicare patients treated by male vs female physicians. Br Dent J 2017;222(3):170. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.116
  8. Henderson JT, Weisman CS. Physician gender effects on preventive screening and counseling: an analysis of male and female patients’ health care experiences. Med Care 2001;39(12):1281–1292. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200112000-00004
  9. Anon. Active physicians by sex and specialty, 2019|AAMC.
  10. Xierali IM, Nivet MA, Wilson MR. Current and future status of diversity in ophthalmologist workforce. JAMA Ophthalmol 2016;134(9):1016–23. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.2257
  11. Fairless EA, Nwanyanwu KH, Forster SH, et al. Ophthalmology departments remain among the least diverse clinical departments at United States Medical Schools. Ophthalmology 2021;128(8):1129–1134. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.01.006
  12. Charlson ES, Tsai L, Yonkers MA, et al. Diversity in the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;35(1):29–32. DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000001127
  13. States U. Statistical groupings of states and counties. Geogr Areas Ref Man 1984:1–25.
  14. Tuli SS. Status of women in academic ophthalmology. J Acad Ophthalmol 2019;11(2):e59–e64. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3401849
  15. Colby K. Sex diversity in ophthalmology leadership in 2020-A call for action. JAMA Ophthalmol 2020;138(5):458–459. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.0188
  16. Jena AB, Khullar D, Ho O, et al. Sex Differences in Academic Rank in US Medical Schools in 2014. JAMA 2015;314(11):1149–1158. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.10680
  17. Carnes M, Bartels CM, Kaatz A, et al. Why is John More likely to become department chair than Jennifer? Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 2015;126:197–214.
  18. Moss-Racusin CA, Dovidio JF, Brescoll VL, et al. Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc Natl Acad Sci US 2012;109(41):16474–16479. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109
  19. Lin F, Oh SK, Gordon LK, et al. Gender-based differences in letters of recommendation written for ophthalmology residency applicants. BMC Med Educ 2019;19(1):476. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-019-1910-6
  20. Villwock JA, Sobin LB, Koester LA, et al. Impostor syndrome and burnout among American medical students: a pilot study. Int J Med Educ 2016;7:364–369. DOI: 10.5116/ijme.5801.eac4
  21. Babcock L, Recalde M, Vesterlund L, et al. Gender differences in accepting and receiving requests for tasks with low promotability. Am Econ Rev 2017;107(3):714–747. DOI: 10.1257/aer.20141734
  22. Cardel MI, Dhurandhar E, Yarar-Fisher C, et al. Turning Chutes into Ladders for Women Faculty: A Review and Roadmap for Equity in Academia. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2020;29(5):721–733. DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2019.8027
  23. Kamanitz JR, el-Mallakh RS, Tasman A. Delusional misidentification involving the self. J Nerv Ment Dis 1989;177(11):658–658.
  24. Clance PR, Imes SA. The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychother Theory Res Pract 1978;15(3):241–247. DOI: 10.1037/h0086006
  25. Oriel K, Plane MB, Mundt M. Family medicine residents and the impostor phenomenon. Fam Med 2004;36(4):248–252.
  26. Lebrón MJ. Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to LeadLean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, by SandbergSheryl. New York, NY: Albert Knopf, Random House, 2013. 228 pages, hard cover. Acad Manag Learn Educ 2016;15:200–203.
  27. Anon. 2020 FACTS: Applicants and Matriculants Data | AAMC.
  28. Olivier MMG, Forster S, Carter KD, et al. Lighting a Pathway: The Minority Ophthalmology Mentoring Program. Ophthalmology 2020;127(7):848–851. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.021
  29. Anon. Ophthalmology Research. Program|Rabb Venable
  30. Lu ES, Bannerman A, Miller JB. Strategies to Increase Underrepresented Minority Trainees in the Ophthalmology Pipeline: Perspective From a Large Retina Research Laboratory. J Vitreoretin Dis 2021;5(6):531–533. DOI: 10.1177/2474126421998607
  31. Shaner MA, Kaplan A, Sesi C, et al. Michigan ophthalmology pipeline: exploring a mentorship model to increase diversity in ophthalmology. J Acad Ophthalmol 2020;12(1):e1–e7. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402074
  32. Yashadhana A, Clarke NA, Zhang JH, et al. Gender and ethnic diversity in global ophthalmology and optometry association leadership: a time for change. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2021;41(3):623–629. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12793
  33. Berkowitz ST, Law JC, Sternberg P, et al. Leadership development in ophthalmology: current impact and future needs. J Acad Ophthalmol 2021;13:e32–e39.
  34. Elliott MN, Fremont A, Morrison PA, et al. A new method for estimating race/ethnicity and associated disparities where administrative records lack self-reported race/ethnicity. Health Serv Res 2008;43(5 Pt 1):1722–1736. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00854.x
  35. Fiscella K, Fremont AM. Use of geocoding and surname analysis to estimate race and ethnicity. Health Serv Res 2006;41(4 Pt 1):1482–1500. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00551.x
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.