37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Perceptions of gender-based discrimination during surgical training and practice

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Women represent 15% of practicing general surgeons. Gender-based discrimination has been implicated as discouraging women from surgery. We sought to determine women's perceptions of gender-based discrimination in the surgical training and working environment.

          Methods

          Following IRB approval, we fielded a pilot survey measuring perceptions and impact of gender-based discrimination in medical school, residency training, and surgical practice. It was sent electronically to 1,065 individual members of the Association of Women Surgeons.

          Results

          We received 334 responses from medical students, residents, and practicing physicians with a response rate of 31%. Eighty-seven percent experienced gender-based discrimination in medical school, 88% in residency, and 91% in practice. Perceived sources of gender-based discrimination included superiors, physician peers, clinical support staff, and patients, with 40% emanating from women and 60% from men.

          Conclusions

          The majority of responses indicated perceived gender-based discrimination during medical school, residency, and practice. Gender-based discrimination comes from both sexes and has a significant impact on women surgeons.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Penalties for success: reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks.

            A total of 242 subjects participated in 3 experimental studies investigating reactions to a woman's success in a male gender-typed job. Results strongly supported the authors' hypotheses, indicating that (a) when women are acknowledged to have been successful, they are less liked and more personally derogated than equivalently successful men (Studies 1 and 2); (b) these negative reactions occur only when the success is in an arena that is distinctly male in character (Study 2); and (c) being disliked can have career-affecting outcomes, both for overall evaluation and for recommendations concerning organizational reward allocation (Study 3). These results were taken to support the idea that gender stereotypes can prompt bias in evaluative judgments of women even when these women have proved themselves to be successful and demonstrated their competence. The distinction between prescriptive and descriptive aspects of gender stereotypes is considered, as well as the implications of prescriptive gender norms for women in work settings. (c) 2004 APA
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Grounded theory: an exploration of process and procedure.

              Grounded theory, as an evolving qualitative research method, is a product of its history as well as of its epistemology. Within the literature, there have been a number of discussions focusing on the differences between Glaser's (1978, 1992) and Strauss's (1987, 1990) versions of grounded theory. The purpose of this article is to add a level of depth and breadth to this discussion through specifically exploring the Glaser-Strauss debate by comparing the data analysis processes and procedures advocated by Glaser and by Strauss. To accomplish this task, the authors present the article in two sections. First, they provide relevant background information on grounded theory as a research method. Second, they pursue a more in-depth discussion of the positions of Glaser, using Glaser's work, and Strauss, using Strauss's and Strauss and Corbin's (1990) work, regarding the different phases of data analysis, specifically addressing the coding procedures, verification, and the issue of forcing versus emergence.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Med Educ Online
                Med Educ Online
                MEO
                Medical Education Online
                Co-Action Publishing
                1087-2981
                03 February 2015
                2015
                : 20
                : 10.3402/meo.v20.25923
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Medicine, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
                [2 ]MedStar Health Research Institute, Hyattsville, MD, USA
                [3 ]Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
                [4 ]Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Adrienne N. Bruce, 3801 T Street NW, Washington, DC 20007, USA, Email: anb48@ 123456georgetown.edu

                Responsible Editor: Terry D. Stratton, PhD, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, USA.

                Article
                25923
                10.3402/meo.v20.25923
                4317470
                25652117
                47bd6acf-da08-4b54-8ff4-02a0622f1e07
                © 2015 Adrienne N. Bruce et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 03 September 2014
                : 23 December 2014
                : 05 January 2015
                Categories
                Research Article

                Education
                gender discrimination,women,sexual harassment,surgery,work discrimination,women in medicine
                Education
                gender discrimination, women, sexual harassment, surgery, work discrimination, women in medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article