The publication gender gap in US academic surgery

Background: Terms such as glass ceiling and sticky floor are still commonly used to describe women's role in academic surgery. Despite continued efforts to address disparities between men and women in the field, gender inequalities persist. Methods: In this investigation we highlight gender differences in published surgical literature by both quantity and impact. Websites for departments of surgery of three academic centers were reviewed to assess the bibliometrics of publications by gender over a two-week period. Results: A one-way ANOVA showed a significantly higher H-index for men than women (p > .05). Further, one-way ANOVA showed significantly more articles published by men than women (p = .019). These differences are most dramatic at the rank of associate professor where the H-index for men is three times that of the women. The rank of full professor showed men had double the number of articles published. Conclusions: These findings align with the previous research that shows a disparity between males and females as they climb the academic ladder. Conducting and publishing research is a vital part of advancement in academic medicine. This study suggests that publication productivity may be a factor that hinders women from advancing within surgery compared to men. Continuing to explore and identify reasons for this gender difference in academic surgery may highlight ways to address the imbalance.