COMPARING THE STATUS OF WOMEN AND MEN IN ACADEMIC MEDICINE

Objective: To explore the status and academic productivity of women co mpared with men in academic internal medicine. Design: Mail survey don e in 1986. Setting: A total of 107 major teaching hospitals in the Uni ted States. Participants: Full-time (1693 of 2510) faculty in cardiolo gy, rheumatology, and general internal medicine; 67% of eligible men a nd 70% of eligible women. Measurements: Academic productivity defined as research grants awarded, abstracts accepted, and papers published i n refereed journals; academic advancement as determined by academic ra nk and tenure status; and monetary compensation. Results: Women entere d academic medicine with shorter periods of fellowship training and we re less likely to be members in the Alpha Omega Alpha honor society, b ut they had job descriptions similar to those of men, with similar all ocation of work between research, clinical, and teaching activities. A fter adjustment, women and men were similar in the numbers of research grants funded as principal investigator (1.9 compared with 2.0), abst racts accepted (6.8 compared with 6.1), and papers published in refere ed journals (28.8 compared with 29.2; all with P > 0.20). Women were a s likely as men to have tenure, but they had lower academic rank (full or associate professor; 33% compared with 47%, P < 0.001) and receive d less compensation ($72 000 compared with $79 600 annually; P < 0.001 ). Conclusion: Although women do similar professional tasks and achiev e similar levels of academic productivity, they receive fewer rewards for their work, both in academic rank and monetary compensation.