Back

Gender Distribution of Organizing Committees and Invited Speakers at the International Conferences on Emergency Medicine

Galletta, G.; Subhan, I.; Marathe, P.

2021-08-15 emergency medicine
10.1101/2021.08.15.21262072 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundIt has been documented that women are under-represented as speakers at emergency medicine conferences globally. This lack of opportunity is likely contributing to the gender gap of women in academic and leadership positions. MethodsThe Gender-Specific Issues Special Interest Group (GSI-SIG) of the International Federation of Emergency Medicine (IFEM) has analyzed the gender distribution of invited speakers, plenary speakers, and organizing committees from its last three International Conferences on Emergency Medicine in 2016, 2018, and 2019. ResultsMen comprised 75% (range 57-92%) of organizing committees, 69% (67-70%) of plenary speakers, and 78% (range 75-81%) of invited speakers. ConclusionThe percentage of women speakers at IFEMs International Conferences on Emergency Medicine is low; even below the percentage of women emergency medicine physicians. By understanding these data and their consequences, changes can be made to close this gender gap and create more equitable opportunities for women and their career advancement. Strengths and Limitations of this studyO_LIThe gender breakdown of local organizing committee members and invited speakers at three consecutive International Conferences on Emergency Medicine heavily favoured men over women. C_LIO_LIHaving women on the host countrys local organizing committee had no effect on the gender distribution of speakers. C_LIO_LIAs these conferences draw speakers and participants from a diverse, international audience, the results are generalizable. C_LIO_LIThe organizing committee and speakers backgrounds (MD, RN, paramedic) were not delineated, and may have skewed the results. C_LIO_LIGender non-conforming individuals were not identified. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.