Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity in the Australian and New Zealand Medical Physics Workforce

Résumé fourni par la source

The consideration of diversity, equity and inclusivity (DEI) is an important part of promoting a robust and respectful workforce, and is critical to the continued success of organisations, including healthcare providers, academic institutions and professional societies. Many professional bodies representing medical physicists have made commitments to DEI principles in the form of mission statements, policies, steering groups, frameworks and workforce surveys. In the Australian and New Zealand medical physics community, DEI work has included reflecting on the impact of stereotypes, surveys on workforce experiences, and capturing workforce diversity metrics (including gender, nationality, age and professional background). These projects have been conducted with the support of the Australasian College of Physical Sciences and Engineering in Medicine (ACPSEM) and have contributed to the enhancement of DEI in the ACPSEM workforce. Most of this work has been focused on gender diversity, reflecting increasing involvement in the Australian and New Zealand workforce: women accounted for 41\% of medical physics trainees and 32\% of registered medical physicists in a 2020 survey. In 2021, the ACPSEM Professional Standards Board (PSB) incepted the creation of a DEI working group. This movement was supported not only by the ACPSEM Board but also the wider medical physics community, both nationally and inter-nationally. The establishment of this group will support best-practice governance, define the diversity metrics most relevant to our profession and use data collected on these metrics to effect positive change within the ACPSEM boards and committees as well as embedding DEI in policies and procedures for internal and external activities. The DEI working group will enhance the ACPSEM's reputation and ultimately ensure all members feel empowered, respected and represented.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.