Research leadership and investigators: Gender distribution in the federal government

Madeline McCarren, Steven Goldman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The National Academies reported in Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2006) that "women are very likely to face discrimination." In academic medicine, gender distribution is becoming more balanced. In the federal government, women also have made progress, doubling their representation in professional positions to 44%. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a research program and a mission to train health care professionals; however, its gender distribution has not been described. Methods: We conducted a descriptive study using public data for positions in the VA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). We followed with a case-control analysis of predictors of receipt of grant funding in the VA. Participants were 224 leadership positions and 132 principal investigators. Results: Women comprised 33% (AHRQ), 27% (NIH), and 0% (VA) of the top research leadership. Across all VA research levels, women comprised 45% to 0%, depending on the service. In the case-control analysis of principal investigators, men had greater odds (odds ratio 8.0) of a Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) trial award. History of first, last, or any authorship on a clinical trial publication in the 10 years before the index trial was only weakly associated with award of a CSP trial. The gender imbalance was not explained by publication history. Conclusions: Marked gender disparities were seen in the VA, except in Health Services Research. Organizations must investigate their practices to reveal disparities, investigate underlying factors, and intervene as needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)811-816
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Medicine
Volume125
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Federal Government
Veterans
Research Personnel
Health Services Research
Research
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Publications
Authorship
Organized Financing
History
Odds Ratio
Medicine
Clinical Trials
Organizations
Delivery of Health Care

Keywords

  • Disparity
  • Education
  • Employment
  • Faculty
  • Gender
  • Research support

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Research leadership and investigators : Gender distribution in the federal government. / McCarren, Madeline; Goldman, Steven.

In: American Journal of Medicine, Vol. 125, No. 8, 08.2012, p. 811-816.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f22ef676a9db46759a83e7c21876d8aa,
title = "Research leadership and investigators: Gender distribution in the federal government",
abstract = "Background: The National Academies reported in Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2006) that {"}women are very likely to face discrimination.{"} In academic medicine, gender distribution is becoming more balanced. In the federal government, women also have made progress, doubling their representation in professional positions to 44{\%}. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a research program and a mission to train health care professionals; however, its gender distribution has not been described. Methods: We conducted a descriptive study using public data for positions in the VA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). We followed with a case-control analysis of predictors of receipt of grant funding in the VA. Participants were 224 leadership positions and 132 principal investigators. Results: Women comprised 33{\%} (AHRQ), 27{\%} (NIH), and 0{\%} (VA) of the top research leadership. Across all VA research levels, women comprised 45{\%} to 0{\%}, depending on the service. In the case-control analysis of principal investigators, men had greater odds (odds ratio 8.0) of a Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) trial award. History of first, last, or any authorship on a clinical trial publication in the 10 years before the index trial was only weakly associated with award of a CSP trial. The gender imbalance was not explained by publication history. Conclusions: Marked gender disparities were seen in the VA, except in Health Services Research. Organizations must investigate their practices to reveal disparities, investigate underlying factors, and intervene as needed.",
keywords = "Disparity, Education, Employment, Faculty, Gender, Research support",
author = "Madeline McCarren and Steven Goldman",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.03.006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "125",
pages = "811--816",
journal = "American Journal of Medicine",
issn = "0002-9343",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research leadership and investigators

T2 - Gender distribution in the federal government

AU - McCarren, Madeline

AU - Goldman, Steven

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Background: The National Academies reported in Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2006) that "women are very likely to face discrimination." In academic medicine, gender distribution is becoming more balanced. In the federal government, women also have made progress, doubling their representation in professional positions to 44%. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a research program and a mission to train health care professionals; however, its gender distribution has not been described. Methods: We conducted a descriptive study using public data for positions in the VA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). We followed with a case-control analysis of predictors of receipt of grant funding in the VA. Participants were 224 leadership positions and 132 principal investigators. Results: Women comprised 33% (AHRQ), 27% (NIH), and 0% (VA) of the top research leadership. Across all VA research levels, women comprised 45% to 0%, depending on the service. In the case-control analysis of principal investigators, men had greater odds (odds ratio 8.0) of a Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) trial award. History of first, last, or any authorship on a clinical trial publication in the 10 years before the index trial was only weakly associated with award of a CSP trial. The gender imbalance was not explained by publication history. Conclusions: Marked gender disparities were seen in the VA, except in Health Services Research. Organizations must investigate their practices to reveal disparities, investigate underlying factors, and intervene as needed.

AB - Background: The National Academies reported in Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2006) that "women are very likely to face discrimination." In academic medicine, gender distribution is becoming more balanced. In the federal government, women also have made progress, doubling their representation in professional positions to 44%. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a research program and a mission to train health care professionals; however, its gender distribution has not been described. Methods: We conducted a descriptive study using public data for positions in the VA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). We followed with a case-control analysis of predictors of receipt of grant funding in the VA. Participants were 224 leadership positions and 132 principal investigators. Results: Women comprised 33% (AHRQ), 27% (NIH), and 0% (VA) of the top research leadership. Across all VA research levels, women comprised 45% to 0%, depending on the service. In the case-control analysis of principal investigators, men had greater odds (odds ratio 8.0) of a Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) trial award. History of first, last, or any authorship on a clinical trial publication in the 10 years before the index trial was only weakly associated with award of a CSP trial. The gender imbalance was not explained by publication history. Conclusions: Marked gender disparities were seen in the VA, except in Health Services Research. Organizations must investigate their practices to reveal disparities, investigate underlying factors, and intervene as needed.

KW - Disparity

KW - Education

KW - Employment

KW - Faculty

KW - Gender

KW - Research support

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864282114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84864282114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.03.006

DO - 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.03.006

M3 - Article

C2 - 22579138

AN - SCOPUS:84864282114

VL - 125

SP - 811

EP - 816

JO - American Journal of Medicine

JF - American Journal of Medicine

SN - 0002-9343

IS - 8

ER -