Gender differences in funding among grant recipients in emergency medicine: A multicenter analysis
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Emergency MedicineDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2019-11-18
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in funded grants between male and female faculty in two academic emergency departments. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of grant funding at two academic emergency departments from January 2012-September 2018. We queried the grants department databases at each institution and obtained records of all funded grants for emergency medicine (EM) faculty. We extracted the following information for each award: gender of the principal investigator (PI), PI academic rank, grant mechanism (government, institutional, industry, organizational), and percent effort. Differences by gender were compared using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon-rank sum. RESULTS: One-hundred and thirty grants were awarded to EM faculty at the two institutions during the study period. Of the funded grants, 35 (27%) of recipients were female. Among grant recipients, females held lower academic ranking than males (p-value < 0.001): Instructor (49% vs 51%), Assistant Professor (36% vs 64%), Associate Professor (9% vs 91%), and Professor (0% vs 100%), respectively. Organizational grants were dispersed equally between funded faculty, but females received a fewer government, industry, and institutional grants (p-value = 0.007). Female grant recipients were awarded a higher median percent of effort compared to males (14% [IQR: 3-51] vs 8% [IQR: 1-15], respectively, p-value = 0.023). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter analysis, gender discrepancies exist among funded grants of EM faculty. Male recipients had higher academic ranking than their female counterparts. Female recipients were less likely to have government, institutional, and industry grants but received a greater percent effort on funding that was awarded.Source
Am J Emerg Med. 2019 Nov 18. pii: S0735-6757(19)30746-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2019.11.006. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1016/j.ajem.2019.11.006Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/28506PubMed ID
31843332Related Resources
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ajem.2019.11.006