Clinical Scholar, Radiology
PURPOSE: To examine the impact of targeted efforts to increase the number of female speakers at the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) Annual Scientific Meeting (ASM) by reporting gender trends for invited faculty in 2017/2018 vs2016.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Faculty rosters for the 2016, 2017, and 2018 SIR ASMs were stratified by gender to quantify female representation at plenary sessions, categorical courses, symposia, self-assessment modules, and "meet-the-expert" sessions. Keynote events, scientific abstract presentations, and award ceremonies were excluded. In 2017, the SIR Annual Meeting Committee issued requirements for coordinators to invite selected women as speakers. Session coordinators are responsible for issuing speaker invitations, and invited speakers have the option to decline.RESULTS: Years 2017 and 2018 showed increases in female speaker representation, with women delivering 13% (89 of 687) and 14% (85 of 605) of all assigned presentations, compared with 9% in 2016 (46 of 514; P= .03 and P= .01, respectively). Gender diversity correlated with the gender of the session coordinator(s). When averaged over a 3-year period, female speakers constituted 7% of the speaker roster (112 of 1,504 presentations) for sessions led by an all-male coordinator team, compared with 36% (108 of 302) for sessions led by at least 1 female coordinator (P < .0001). Results of the linear regression model confirmed the effect of coordinator team gender composition (P < .0001).CONCLUSIONS: Having a woman as a session coordinator increased female speaker participation, which suggests that the inclusion of more women as coordinators is one mechanism for achieving gender balance at scientific meetings.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.07.006
View details for PubMedID 31587951
To assess attitudes of interventional radiologists toward occupational ionizing radiation exposure in pregnancy and to survey practice patterns and outcomes.A 34-question anonymous online survey on attitudes and work practices toward interventional radiologists who worked during pregnancy was sent to active SIR members, including 582 women.There were 534 (10%) respondents, including 142 women and 363 men. Among respondents, men were statistically older than women (P < .001) and had practiced interventional radiology (IR) longer (P < .001). Of female interventional radiologists, 55% had worked during pregnancy and reported no specific mutagenic events in their offspring. Spontaneous abortions (11%) and use of reproductive technology (17%) matched that of women with similar age and socioeconomic background. Although more women changed their work practice because of concerns of occupational exposure than men (23% vs 13%), this change was largely limited to the duration of a pregnancy. Among pregnant interventional radiologists, 4 (6%) completely abstained from performing fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGIs), whereas 31 (46%) continued to spend > 80% of their work week doing FGIs with additional protection. Perceptions of impact of pregnancy on daytime work redistribution varied significantly with gender (P < .001); however, perceptions regarding impact of pregnancy on on-call hours, distribution of complex cases, and need to hire for temporary coverage were similar between the genders.Most pregnant interventional radiologists continue to practice IR while pregnant. Pregnancy and fetal outcomes parallel that of the general population when matched for demographics. However, perceptions of impact of pregnancy on work lives of colleagues vary notably.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.03.040
View details for PubMedID 27236211
To enhance the educational experience among residents rotating through interventional radiology (IR) by encouraging ownership and responsibility.In May 2006, the authors implemented changes in resident education in IR that included increased clinical responsibilities, structured didactics, and greater hands-on experience, including call. Residents were assigned as first assistants, ownership of cases was encouraged, and assignment to a week on the consult service was instituted to help residents better understand all aspects of IR practice. Additional faculty recruitment and program expansion ensured the same high level of training for the fellowship program. Evaluations were reviewed every year (July 1, 2007-June 30, 2009) for hands-on training, daily teaching, didactic conferences, and overall effectiveness of the clinical service. A graduated scale of 1-5 was used.In 2009, 3 years after the curricular changes were made, the quality of hands-on training, daily case reviews and consults, didactics, and overall education had markedly improved with 89%, 71%, 65%, and 82% of the residents rating these respective aspects of the training as "above expectations" (4 on a scale of 5) or "superior" (5 on a scale of 5) compared with 77%, 23%, 20%, and 60% in 2005-2006. Three years after the changes, the impact of these changes on recruitment patterns also showed improvement, with 28.6% of the class of 2010 pursuing a fellowship in IR.Increasing resident ownership, responsibility, and hands-on experience improves resident education in IR, which, in turn, promotes interest in the field.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.07.009
View details for PubMedID 20884234
To examine perceptions of interventional radiology (IR) among a group of second-year medical students and support the case for early exposure to the field in order to increase visibility and, ultimately, recruitment to this specialty.Sixty-five members of the class of 2011 from a single U.S. institution were anonymously surveyed about their opinions on IR before and after a 1-hour case-based introductory lecture.Sixty-four students completed the survey in its entirety. Perception about what IR entails varied, with 52% of the students aware of IR involvement in major and potentially life-saving procedures; however, 34% believed that an interventional radiologist primarily performed "minor" procedures or "read films." Previous interaction with interventional radiologists was uncommon. Following the single, case-based introductory IR lecture, 74% of the class was eager to learn more about the specialty, with 22% interested in enrolling in a dedicated hands-on elective in IR. The perception and impression of what IR entails changed significantly for the better for 75% of the students. Before the lecture, 19% were considering IR as a career (first or second choice); this increased to 33% after the introductory lecture.Although medical students are aware of IR, their exposure and understanding is limited. They are keen to learn more when exposed to it. Reaching out to the medical students early in their career may help in recruiting talent and securing the specialty's growth.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2009.12.397
View details for Web of Science ID 000276663700019
View details for PubMedID 20189831