↓ Skip to main content

Where Are the Women in Orthopaedic Surgery?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
227 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
Title
Where Are the Women in Orthopaedic Surgery?
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-4827-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel S. Rohde, Jennifer Moriatis Wolf, Julie E. Adams

Abstract

Although women account for approximately half of the medical students in the United States, they represent only 13% of orthopaedic surgery residents and 4% of members of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Furthermore, a smaller relative percentage of women pursue careers in orthopaedic surgery than in any other subspecialty. Formal investigations regarding the gender discrepancy in choice of orthopaedic surgery are lacking. (1) What reasons do women orthopaedic surgeons cite for why they chose this specialty? (2) What perceptions do women orthopaedic surgeons think might deter other women from pursuing this field? (3) What role does early exposure to orthopaedics and mentorship play in this choice? (4) What professional and personal choices do women in orthopaedics make, and how might this inform students who are choosing a career path? A 21-question survey was emailed to all active, candidate, and resident members of the Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society (RJOS, n = 556). RJOS is the oldest surgical women's organization incorporated in the United States. An independent orthopaedic specialty society, RJOS supports leadership training, mentorship, grant opportunities, and advocacy for its members and promotes sex-related musculoskeletal research. Although not all women in orthopaedic practice or training belong to RJOS, it is estimated that 42% of women AAOS fellows are RJOS members. Questions were formulated to determine demographics, practice patterns, and lifestyle choices of women who chose orthopaedic surgery as a specialty. Specifically, we evaluated the respondents' decisions about their careers and their opinions of why more women do not choose this field. For the purpose of this analysis, the influences and dissuaders were divided into three major categories: personal attributes, experience/exposure, and work/life considerations. The most common reasons cited for having chosen orthopaedic surgery were enjoyment of manual tasks (165 of 232 [71%]), professional satisfaction (125 of 232 [54%]), and intellectual stimulation (123 of 232 [53%]). The most common reasons indicated for why women might not choose orthopaedics included perceived inability to have a good work/life balance (182 of 232 [78%]), perception that too much physical strength is required (171 of 232 [74%]), and lack of strong mentorship in medical school or earlier (161 of 232 [69%]). Respondents frequently (29 of 45 [64%]) commented that their role models, mentors, and early exposure to musculoskeletal medicine were influential, but far fewer (62 of 231 [27%]) acknowledged these in their top five influences than they did the more "internal" motivators. To our knowledge, this is the largest study of women orthopaedic surgeons regarding factors influencing their professional and personal choices. Our data suggest that the relatively few women currently practicing orthopaedics were attracted to the field because of their individual personal affinity for its nature despite the lack of role models and exposure. The latter factors may impact the continued paucity of women pursuing this field. Programs designed to improve mentorship and increase early exposure to orthopaedics and orthopaedic surgeons may increase personal interest in the field and will be important to attract a diverse group of trainees to our specialty in the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 273 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 42 15%
Student > Bachelor 34 12%
Researcher 27 10%
Other 24 9%
Student > Postgraduate 20 7%
Other 50 18%
Unknown 77 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 42%
Social Sciences 16 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 25 9%
Unknown 98 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,966,249
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#251
of 7,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,310
of 314,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#7
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,394 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.