The interventional radiology gender gap: perspectives from the international IR training survey
Rattachement africain : gb, gr. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to examine international interventional radiology (IR) training standards and perceptions. This survey aims to identify gender-based barriers and inequities effecting uptake, retention and experience of trainees in IR. METHODS: An anonymous survey was created using Survey Monkey and distributed as a single-use weblink via eight IR national and international societies around the world. Data analysis was conducted to highlight gender-specific trends and identify any differences. RESULTS: 81.3% M) agreed or strongly agreed that early exposure to IR training at Year 1 had a positive impact on career choice. A good work life balance was positively reported in 48.2% of female respondents compared to 45.2% in males. There were no significant differences in satisfaction with the various aspects of IR training. All differences observed between genders, exceeded the 0.05 significance level. CONCLUSION: This survey offers many insights into the current international landscape of IR training. Ongoing evaluation is vital to inform recruitment practices and initiatives to bridge gender inequities and attract more females into IR. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study has revealed that increasing and optimising mentoring opportunities may be the first step in increasing awareness of IR and maximising potential female recruits.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The interventional radiology gender gap: perspectives from the international IR training survey
- Date Crossref
- 09/06/2022
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.