Academic Promotions in Medicine: Characterizing Differences in Curriculum Vitae Across Race and Sex.

Abstract

Evaluate quantitative and qualitative differences by sex and race/ethnic identities in curriculum vitae (CV) of faculty candidates for promotion. This was a retrospective, multisite, single-institution study of all candidates who applied to be considered for promotion to associate professor or professor from January 2015 to July 2019. Data on leadership positions, grants, and publications were abstracted from CV using a standardized procedure. Demographic data, including sex, race, and part-time status were obtained from the Human Resources database. Characteristics from CV were compared between groups using χ² or Fisher exact tests for categorical data, and Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous data. A total of 162 women and 300 men applied for associate professorship and 89 women and 231 men applied for professorship. There were 304 White, 112 Asian, and 43 underrepresented in medicine (URM) candidates for associate professorship and 228 White, 68 Asian, and 22 URM candidates for professorship. Women were more likely to work part-time than men (associate professor: 23.5% vs 3.3%, respectively, P<.001; professor: 24.7% vs 5.6%, respectively, P<.001) and had fewer papers published overall (associate professor: median 35 vs 40, respectively, P=.001; professor: median 66 vs 77, respectively, P=.012). White candidates were more likely to have held an elected office to society (13.5% vs 3.6% Asian vs 0% URM, P=.001). Asian candidates were less likely to be a chair/co-chair compared with White individuals and other URMs (3.6% vs 10.9% vs 14.0%, respectively, P=.043). The ratios of candidates for professor-to-associate professor for women and URM was 50% compared with 25% for White men, respectively. The participants' CV demonstrated notable differences associated with the candidate's race/ethnicity and sex.