Women and minorities are underrepresented in US academic medicine. The Sullivan Commission on Diversity in the Healthcare Workforce emphasized the importance of diverse leadership for reducing health care disparities. The objective of this study was to evaluate the demographics of the American Society of Anesthesiologists leadership. We hypothesized that the percentage of women and underrepresented minorities is less than that of their respective proportions in the general physician workforce.
An electronic survey was developed by the authors and mailed to 595 members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists leadership who had valid email addresses, including the members of the 2014 House of Delegates and state society leaders who were not the members of the House of Delegates. Univariate statistics were used to characterize survey responses and the probability distributions were estimated using the binomial distribution. A one-sample t test was used to compare the percentage of women and minorities in the survey pool to that of the corresponding percentages in the general physician workforce (38.0% women and 8.9% minorities), and the US population (51.0% women and 32.0% minorities).
The survey response rate was 54%. A total of 21.1% (95% confidence interval: 16.4%-25.7%) of respondents were women and 6.0% (95% confidence interval: 3.3%-8.7%) were minorities. The proportion of women in the American Society of Anesthesiologist leadership was lower than the general medical workforce and the US population (P < .001 for both); the proportion of underrepresented minorities was lower than the US population (P < .001).
Women and minorities are underrepresented in the leadership of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Efforts should be made to increase the diversity of the American Society of Anesthesiologists leadership with the goal of reducing overall anesthesia workforce disparities.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 17 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,182,059
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Anesthesia and analgesia
#519
of 10,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,154
of 355,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anesthesia and analgesia
#6
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,894 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 355,879 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 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 95% of its contemporaries.
