Presentation Authors: Anjali Kapur*, Tal Cohen, Michael Hung, Michael Gross, William Berg, Stony Brook, NY, Wai Lee, Seattle, WA, Jason Kim, Steven Weissbart, Stony Brook, NY
Introduction: There is a significant gender disparity in the urology workforce, with females comprising just 8.5% of practicing urologists in 2016. However, there is a trend towards improvement in this gender gap, with the average percentage of women in urology residency programs rising from 1.9% in 1978 to 23.1% in 2013. Limited data exists regarding factors that influence females pursuing urology. We sought to determine if faculty and resident gender plays a role in match rates of female urology applicants.
Methods: We utilized results from the 2018 AUA match encompassing all US accredited urology programs. The number of female and male core faculty and residents at each institution were identified. Programs with incomplete data availability and military-affiliated programs were excluded. Correlations between the number and proportion of female core faculty and residents at each program and number and proportion of matched female applicants to that program were calculated. Match results were further stratified by AUA section and analyzed.
Results: A total of 314 urology vacancies were initially filled in the 2018 AUA match, with 79 matched female applicants. Our analysis included 108 programs with complete publicly available data of faculty and residents. Only 8 programs (7.4%) had 50% or greater female resident representation. 16 programs (14.8%) had no female faculty members at all. 28 programs (25.9%) had only 1 female core faculty member vs. 64 programs (59.2%) with 1 or more female core faculty members. There was a positive correlation between matched female applicants with proportion of female faculty (r=0.22, p=0.02). Additionally, there was a positive correlation between matched female applicants and female resident representation (r=0.23, p=0.01). When stratified by AUA section, there was no significant difference in the proportion of females matched between AUA sections (p=0.61).
Conclusions: The number of female applicants to urology continues to rise with a concomitant narrowing gender gap amongst urology residency programs. In the 2018 AUA match, the proportion of matched female applicants correlates positively with the proportion of female faculty and residents in that program, regardless of location. The reason for this correlation is unclear but may be due to a sense of common gender identity, opportunity for female academic mentorship, or fewer barriers to females attaining leadership positions at these institutions. Future research in this area is needed.