Development of the Gender Equity Report Card.

Purpose: Despite a narrowed gender gap in medical school matriculants, gender equity is lacking in faculty and senior leadership positions in academic medicine.1 In 2020, the Association of American Medical Colleges published a position statement on gender equity that established “4 areas that require action” to achieve gender equity: workforce, research, leadership/compensation, and recognition.2 Though there are tools measuring gender equity on an organizational level outside of academic medicine, a tool specific to academic medicine does not exist. To address this, we created a literature-driven “Gender Equity Report Card”: a standardized tool to track departmental and institutional gender equity efforts over time with the goal of using data for advocacy and promoting change. Approach: A web-based search identified 3 existing tools in health care and research to measure gender equity (Global Health 50/50, the Athena Scientific Women’s Academic Network [SWAN] awards [United Kingdom], and the New York Stem Cell Foundation Report Card on Gender Equality). We then conducted a literature review using the terms “gender equity” and “academic medicine,” yielding 57 publications. Articles were included if they were a commentary/expert review/research study, published within the last 10 years, pertinent to academic medicine, and if gender equity was central. This led to the identification of 6 domains and associated metrics, as well as highlighted the need for the metrics to be specific, measurable, actionable, reflective of the institution, and to capture a multifaceted understanding of gender equity. A pilot version of the report card was issued to 6 academic medicine departments in April 2022 via an online survey. Each department completed an online feedback survey. Outcomes: We compared individual departments to all pilot departments, as well as nationally available data. Preliminary analysis indicated that pilot departments had levels of gender equity that surpassed the national averages. The majority of departments reported having formal roles dedicated to gender equity and financial support for faculty/leadership development for women and gender minorities. Pilot departments had a majority of female faculty at the assistant (57%) and associate (68%) professor levels, though not at the full professor level (39%). Overall, 57% of faculty in the pilot department were female. Comparatively, at the national level, there was a lower percentage of female faculty at every level: assistant (48%), associate (40%), full (28%), and overall (41%). Feedback from the participating departments highlighted the time-consuming nature of completing the report card (average 10.4 hours to complete), which required a collaborative effort, with 80% of the departments indicating that the data collection process was “somewhat difficult.” Barriers included incomplete departmental datasets, insufficient data collection mechanisms, and challenges around including nonbinary/transgender faculty. In sum, the literature-driven process of creating the Gender Equity Report Card identified 6 domains to track. The pilot process demonstrated that surveyed departments were making strides around gender equity at a level that outpaces national performance on several benchmarks. However, the pilot process presented challenges around data collection that need to be addressed before full-scale launch to all departments. Specifically, departments need support around creating centralized and comprehensive datasets, as well as institutional-level mandates for completion. Significance: Utilization of a standardized data collection and reporting tool on gender equity in academic medicine not only provides a snapshot of where the institution is at present but also allows for goal setting and tracking progress. The Gender Equity Report Card fills a gap in evaluation and data tracking of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in academic medicine.