Skip to main content
NCBI home page
JBJS Open Access logoLink to JBJS Open Access
. 2021 May 28;6(2):e20.00157. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00157

A 15-Year Report on the Uneven Distribution of Women in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Training Programs in the United States

Ann E Van Heest 1, Julie Agel 1, Julie Balch Samora 2,✉
PMCID: PMC8169074  PMID: 34095695

Abstract

Background:

This study was undertaken to update reports from 2004 to 2005 through 2008 to 2009, and 2009 to 2010 through 2013 to 2014, including 5 additional years of GME Track data. Our hypothesis is there have been no significant changes during the past 5 years in the distribution of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedics residency programs that train female residents, compared with the previous 10 years.

Methods:

Data for ACGME-accredited orthopaedics residency training programs in the United States were analyzed for 5 consecutive academic years (2014-2015 through 2018-2019). Programs were classified as having no women, 1 woman, 2 women, or greater than 2 women in training. Programs were analyzed for percentage of female residents and classified as having above the national average (>20%), similar to the national average (between 10 and 20%), or below the national average (<10%).

Results:

Analysis of the original 5 years (2004-2009) compared with the most recent data (2014-2019) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the number of programs training women (p < 0.001). From 2004 to 2009 to 2014 to 2019, the absolute number and percent of female trainees have increased (p < 0.001). Similar analysis of the middle 5 years (2009-2014) compared with the most recent 5 years (2014-2019) did not demonstrate a statistically significant change (p = 0.12). From 2014 to 2019, residency programs in the United States continue to train women at unequal rates: 37 programs had no female trainees, while 53 programs had >20% female trainees during at least one of these 5 years.

Conclusions:

Female medical students continue to pursue orthopaedics at rates lagging behind all other surgical specialties. Not all residency programs train women at equal rates. If the rate of training of female residents over the past 15 years were projected over time, we would not achieve 30% women within orthopaedics residency training programs until approximately 2060.

Level of Evidence:

III.

Although 57% of undergraduates are female and 50% of medical students are female, only 15% of orthopaedic residents are female (Fig. 1). Over the past 15 years, there has been a slow, yet steady, increase in the percent of women choosing orthopaedic surgery training (Fig. 2). Brotherton et al. published annual Graduate Medical Education (GME) demographics of all residency training programs in the United States1-6. In a recent report (Table I), the percent of female residents showed a wide variability in the top 10 specialties by size (83% ob/gyn to 14% orthopaedic surgery). Orthopaedic surgery has a smaller percentage of female trainees compared with all other surgical specialties (Fig. 3).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Sex profile according to the level of education. AAOS= American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Percentage of women in orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the United States according to academic year.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Percentage of women in surgical residency programs in the United States in 2014 according to surgical specialty. Source: Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate Medical Education, 2018-2019. JAMA. 2019;322:996-1016.7

TABLE I.

2019 Top 10 Specialties by Size

Specialty No. of Residency Positions Percent of All Residency Positions No. of Female Residents Percent of Female Residents
Internal medicine 27,179 20 11,474 42
Family medicine 12,441 9 6,670 54
General surgery 9,303 7 3,839 41
Pediatrics 8,950 7 6,449 72
Emergency medicine 7,681 6 2,722 35
Anesthesiology 6,141 5 2,065 34
Psychiatry 6,014 4 2,999 50
Obstetrics/gynecology 5,453 4 4,550 83
Radiology 4,362 3 1,171 27
Orthopaedic surgery 4,021 3 619 15
Open in a new tab

Source: Brotherton and Etzel, Graduate Medical Education, 2018-2019. JAMA. 2019;322:996-1016.7

“The Uneven Distribution of Women in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Training Programs in the United States” examined GME Track data for 5 academic years from 2004 to 2005 through 2008 to 20098. Orthopaedic residency programs across the United States do not train women at an equal frequency. In that report, more than one-third of orthopaedic residency programs in the United States trained very few women, that is, had an average of <10% female trainees over the 5-year period. However, more than ten programs had an average of >20% female trainees over the 5 years.

“A 5-Year Update on the Uneven Distribution of Women in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Training Programs in the United States”9 updates the report to include data from 2009 to 2010 through 2013 to 2014. From 2004 to 2009, the mean percentage of female trainees in US orthopaedic surgery residency programs was 11.6%, and from 2009 to 2014, this mean percentage increased to 13.6%. Residency programs continued to train women at unequal rates. Thirty programs had no female trainees during at least one of the 5 years, and 8 programs had no female trainees during each of the 5 years. On the other end of the spectrum, 49 programs had >20% female residents enrolled during one of the 5 years and 9 programs had >20% female residents during all 5 years.

This study will test the hypothesis that there have been no significant changes during the past 5 years, 2014 to 2015 through 2018 to 2019, in the distribution of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs that train female residents, when compared with the previous 10 years.

Materials and Methods

The GME Track is a resident database and tracking system to track national census data. It is run jointly by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the American Medical Association (AMA). Since 2009, orthopaedic surgery is tracked for PGY1 through PGY5. Sex data are required for each resident entered in the GME Track database as a binary value: male or female.

Data for all ACGME-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency training programs were analyzed for 5 consecutive academic years (2014-2015 through 2018-2019) similarly to previous reports (2004-2005 through 2008-2009, and 2009-2010 through 2013-2014)8,9. One program was excluded because it had fewer than 2 residents per training year.

The number and percentage of female residents in training at each institution during each academic year were recorded. Programs were classified as having no women, 1 woman, 2 women, or greater than 2 women in training for each of the 5 academic years. Programs were also analyzed for percentage of female residents in training and classified as having above the national average (>20%), similar to the national average (between 10 and 20%), or below the national average (<10%) for the 5 academic years. For programs with no women in training, they were further classified as to how many of the 5 academic years they had no women. The number of women and male residents in training for each of the past 15 years was reported.

Descriptive statistics were used to calculate frequency counts, percentages, and χ2 analysis. Excel and SPSS, v.26 were used for all analysis.

Source of Funding

This project was supported by an AAOS grant through the Diversity Advisory Board. The grant was used to purchase GME Track data from AAMC for orthopaedic surgery resident data by residency program, specialty, and sex for academic years 2014 to 2015 through 2018 to 2019. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the AAMC.

Results

Averaged over 5-year periods, the percent of female trainees in orthopaedic surgery residency programs has increased from an average of 11.6% female resident trainees in 2004 to 2009, and an average of 13.6% female trainees in 2009 to 2014, to an average of 15.0% female trainees in 2014 to 2019. The number of women and male residents for each of the past 15 years is shown in Table II. A comparison of the proportion of residents who were women in 2004 to 2005 compared with the proportion of residents who were women in 2018 to 2019 shows a statistically significant increase (p <0.001).

TABLE II.

Number of Male and Female Residents in Training by Year

Year 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
No. of Women 297 347 352 378 417 488 502 520 537 547 528 548 563 603 610
No. of Men 2,670 2,784 2,731 2,686 2,760 3,162 3,247 3,313 3,344 3,426 3,176 3,238 3,309 3,352 3,353
Total Number 2,967 3,131 3,083 3,064 3,177 3,650 3,749 3,833 3,881 3,973 3,704 3,786 3,872 3,955 3,963
Open in a new tab

Variations in Residency Program Female Demographics

Residency programs in the United States do not train women at an equal rate. The number of women enrolled in orthopaedic surgery residency programs during each academic year between 2014 and 2019 is shown in Fig. 4. From 2014 to 2019, the number of programs that were training no women decreased: 25 of 175 orthopaedic residency programs had no women enrolled (PGY1-5) during the 2014 to 2015 academic year; 23 of 177 had no women in 2015 to 16; 19 of 178 had no women in 2016 to 17; 12 of 176 had no women in 2017 to 18; and 12 of 179 had no women in 2018 to 2019. The number of residency programs that enrolled only one woman was 36 in 2014 to 2015, 31 in 2015 to 2016, 34 in 2016 to 2017, 29 in 2017 to 2018, and 33 in 2018 to 2019.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Graduate Medical Education Track data for the number of women in orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the United States according to academic year.

The percentage of women during each academic year between 2014 and 2019 is shown in Fig. 5. Over the most recent 5 years of GME Track data, between 175 and 179 programs met inclusion criteria for analysis. For these 5 years, between 45% and 53% of residency programs in the United States trained very few women, that is, had an average of <10% female trainees over the 5-year period. Between 27% and 44% of residency programs in the United States trained more than an average amount of women, that is, had an average of >20% female trainees over the 5 years.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Graduate Medical Education Track data for the percentage of women in orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the United States according to academic year.

2014 to 2019 Data Compared with 2004 to 2009 and with 2009 to 2014 Data

χ2 analysis of the original 5 years of GME Track data (2004-2009) examining PGY2-5, compared with the most recent 5 years of GME Track data (2014-2019) examining PGY1-5, demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the number of programs training women (p < 0.001). From 2004 to 2009, 39% of programs were training 0 to 1 women, which decreased to 29% of programs from 2014 to 2019. From 2004 to 2009, 61% of programs were training ≥ 2 women, which increased to 71% from 2014 to 2019. Similar analysis of the middle 5 years of GME Track data (2009-2014) compared with the most recent 5 years of data (2014-2019) did not demonstrate a statistically significant change (p = 0.12). Programs training 0 to 1 women remained minimally changed (32% vs. 29%). Programs training ≥ 2 women were minimally changed as well (68% vs. 71%).

Discussion

This study tested the hypothesis that there have been no significant changes during the past 5 years (2014-2019) in the distribution of ACGME-accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs that train female residents, when compared with the previous 10 years. Significant positive improvements are seen when the 2014 to 2019 data are compared with the earliest (2004-2009) data: The number and the percentage of female trainees have increased, and the number of residency programs training few women has decreased while the number of residency programs training >20% women has increased. However, when the 2014 to 2019 data are compared with the 2009 to 2014 data, although continued positive trends exist, statistically significant improvements are not present, indicating that the rate of change is very slow for increasing sex diversity in orthopaedic surgery residency training. About one-third of programs still train 0 to 1 women. If one subscribes to the diversity goal of 30% within a group10, projecting the training rate of female residents using the past 15 years of data (assuming the number of programs and residents remains constant), the goal of 30% women within orthopaedic surgery residency training programs would not be achieved until 2060.

Diversity enhances both education and patient care by advancing cultural competency, promoting an inclusive environment, improving access to care, and leading to better outcomes. Research has shown that patients often prefer treatment by physicians of the same sex11. In a large Commonwealth Fund study representing 87 million men and 104 million women aged 18 years and older in the United States, women seek more medical care than men along the age spectrum12. Furthermore, women have been shown to have higher rates of orthopaedic surgical interventions than men13. With many female orthopaedic patients, diversifying the workforce of orthopaedic surgeons provides patients with greater choice. Bennett et al.14 found that it will take orthopaedic surgery 138 years to reach levels of female representation comparable with that of the overall US population.

The reasons for this disparity are not entirely clear but are likely multifactorial. It does not seem that academic metrics explain the underrepresentation of women in orthopaedic residencies15. Rao et al.16 found that medical students pursued their specialty on lifestyle/quality of life issues as well as the subject matter itself. In a survey distributed to members of the Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society, the most common reasons cited for why women might not choose orthopaedic surgery were perceived inability to have good work/life balance, perception that too much physical strength is required, and lack of strong mentorship17. It has been suggested that orthopaedics as a specialty has inherent barriers, including a culture of long hours, personal sacrifice, a lack of flexibility, and a heavy workload18.

Perhaps, orthopaedics is perceived as a specialty unwelcome to women. Samora et al.19 found that 81% of female respondents of an AAOS survey had experienced discrimination, bullying, or harassment. Similarly, in a Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society survey, 68% of women reported having experienced sexual harassment during their orthopaedic training, and 61.7% reported being asked an inappropriate question during residency interviews, including issues about child-bearing and marital status20,21. In a survey of women in orthopaedics, 74% had experienced microaggressions, which are defined as verbal, nonverbal, or environmental slights that are either intentional or unintentional conveying hostile, derogatory, or otherwise negative messages22.

Perhaps decisions about family planning and pregnancy may affect career choice. There is significant variability in residency programs with maternity leave policies23. In a survey distributed to members of the American Orthopaedic Association's Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors, 53% of male program directors believed that pregnancy and parenthood negatively affected female residents' scholarly activities24. Furthermore, they believed that pregnancy and parenthood imposed a burden on fellow trainees.

Lack of exposure early in training to the musculoskeletal system is another potential factor. Medical school experiences have been shown to shape female students' interest in orthopaedic surgery25. As much as 75% of female orthopaedic surgeons reported lesser degrees of exposure to orthopaedic surgery than to other surgical subspecialities26. Mandatory musculoskeletal instruction during medical school was associated with a 12% increase in application to orthopaedics27.

The presence of female residents was ranked in the top 5 most important factors for female applicants28. Women place more importance on the presence of female and racial/ethnic minority faculty. Female representation in orthopaedic faculty has increased in the past 15 years (Table III). Okike et al.29 also demonstrated that underrepresented minorities (URM) who attended medical school at institutions with high URM representation on orthopaedic faculty and in residencies were more likely to apply to orthopaedics. Geographical differences exist, with the Mid-Atlantic region having the lowest percentage of female orthopaedic faculty (5.6%) compared with the mountain region (18%)30. The lowest female representation in residencies is in the South, with the highest in the Northeast and West31.

TABLE III.

Distribution of US Medical School Orthopaedic Faculty by Sex and Rank 2019, 2014, and 2009

2019 Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor
Female 96 135 424 131
Total 892 911 1901 317
Percent 10.8 14.8 22.3 41.3
2014 Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor
Female 49 94 255 71
Total 738 705 1,369 267
Percent 6.6 13.3 18.6 26.6
2009 Professor Associate Professor Assistant Professor Instructor
Female 29 76 183 54
Total 600 607 1,160 236
Percent 4.8 12.5 15.8 22.9
Open in a new tab

Objective measures of career productivity, leadership positions, and academic success have been shown to be inferior for women than for men, which could be a factor in career choice. Women average fewer publications than their male counterparts in orthopaedic sports medicine and are more frequently attributed middle authorship rather than senior authorship32. From 1987 to 2017, 1.7% of senior authors and 4.4% of first authors of orthopaedic publications were female33. There has never been a female editor-in-chief of the 3 major orthopaedic journals34. The majority of women have academic rank of instructor, with only 8.7% achieving full professor35. Only 1 woman (1%) was department chair during the 2015 to 2016 academic year35. There are also income disparities, with female orthopaedic surgeons earning $62,000 less income per year compared with men, accounting for subspecialty choice, hours worked, work status, case volume, years in practice, and practice setting36. Possible explanations for this difference may include fewer women in private practice and women holding positions of lesser rank in academia. Men also receive 3 times more industry payments than women in orthopaedics37.

Challenging this disparity will require a multifaceted strategy that includes increasing exposure at all levels to foster the pipeline and maintain the women in this field. Leadership is critical to promote a culture of diversity and inclusion. Leaders must provide mentorship, opportunities, and resources for women/URM to be successful as they advance through their careers and must consider inclusion criteria for diverse candidates10. In the National Football League, the “Rooney Rule” was adopted in 2003 requiring teams to interview at least one minority candidate when choosing a new head coach, which increased the number of minority coaches in the league.

As size of the minority group increases, there will be continued benefits for the successes of future minorities in the field; as the minority group approaches 30%, the larger representation makes the group no longer a minority. Having a role model of the same sex is significantly more important for women in influencing their decision to pursue orthopaedics38. Furthermore, same sex mentorship has been associated with career choice, academic success, and high job satisfaction39. Programs with more female faculty members and more women in leadership positions tend to have more female residents40. Similarly, women who attended medical schools with high faculty sex diversity and high resident sex diversity were more likely to apply for orthopaedics41. There is a strong correlation between the percentage of women in an orthopaedic subspecialty society and the percentage of women on the society's board of directors42. Representation of female speakers at annual meetings has been shown to be largely proportionate to the membership of women in societies43. Increased numbers of women in leadership and as speakers in societies with greater female representation may be a chicken and egg paradox, that is, which existed first and which caused the other.

Diversity of applicants should be pursued and measured. Pipeline programs and early exposure can have a positive impact on pursuit of an orthopaedic career44,45. We should be cognizant to dispel negative misconceptions and support a culture without biases that will encourage individuals from all backgrounds to consider a career in orthopaedics. With diversity as a priority, we can create and maintain a workforce that better reflects the US population to reduce healthcare disparities, improve the overall health of our population, and enrich the field of orthopaedics.

There were several weaknesses to this study. The findings of this study were based on GME Track data, a national database of information required by the AMA and the AAMC. If the data entered into this database were inaccurate or incomplete, the results presented in this study would also be inaccurate or incomplete. Despite these limitations, these data were the most accurate sex data available for residency training programs in the United States, as they are required by the AMA and AAMC. The GME Track data did not include important information that would be helpful in understanding why women are poorly represented in orthopaedic surgery residency programs (i.e., data regarding application and match rates for female and male medical students, the quality and background of medical student applicants, or the scholastic performance of male and female residents).

In conclusion, the findings of this study confirm that ACGME orthopaedic residency programs continue to train fewer women than other specialties, with minimal change over the past 15 years. Providing a greater exposure to orthopaedics during medical school, increasing the number of female faculty to serve as role models, and creating an environment of acceptance led by senior surgical faculty are recommended steps toward increasing sex diversity in orthopaedic residency programs.

Footnotes

Investigation performed at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH

Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJSOA/A276).

Contributor Information

Ann E. Van Heest, Email: vanhe003@umn.edu.

Julie Agel, Email: agelx003@umn.edu.

References

  • 1.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2008-2009. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1357-72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2009-2010. JAMA. 2010;304(11):1255-70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2010-2011. JAMA. 2011;306(9):1015-30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2011-2012. JAMA. 2012;308(21):2264-79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2012-2013. JAMA. 2013;310(21):2328-46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2013-2014. JAMA. 2014;312(22):2427-45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2018-2019. JAMA. 2019;322:996-1016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Van Heest AE, Agel J. The uneven distribution of women in orthopaedic surgery resident training programs in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(2):e9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Van Heest AE, Fishman F, Agel J. A 5-year update on the uneven distribution of women in orthopaedic surgery residency training programs in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(1-9):e64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Harrington MA, Rankin EA, Ladd AL, Mason BS. The orthopaedic workforce is not as diverse as the population it serves: where are the minorities and the women? AOA critical issues symposium. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(8):e31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Derose KP, Hays RD, McCaffrey DF, Baker DW. Does physician gender affect satisfaction of men and women visiting the emergency department? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(4):218-26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sandman D, Simantov E, An C. Out of Touch: American Men and the Health Care System. The Commonwealth Fund. March; 2000. Available at: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sites/default/files/documents/___media_files_publications_fund_report_2000_mar_out_of_touch__american_men_and_the_health_care_system_sandman_outoftouch_374_pdf.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Borkhoff CM, Hawker GA, Wright JG. Patient gender affects the referral and recommendation for total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(7):1829-37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bennett CL, Baker O, Rangel EL, Marsh RH. The gender gap in surgical residencies. JAMA Surg. 2000;155(9):893-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Poon S, Nellans K, Crabb RAL, Rothman A, Wendolowski SF, Kiridly D, Gecelter R, Akerman M, Chahine NO. Academic metrics do not explain the underrepresentation of women in orthopaedic training programs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(8):e32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Rao RD, Khatib ON, Agarwal A. Factors motivating medical students in selecting a career specialty: relevance for a robust orthopaedic pipeline. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017;25(7):527-35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Rohde RS, Wolf JM, Adams JE. Where are the women in orthopaedic surgery? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(9):1950-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Emery SE, Presidents C. Diversity in orthopaedic surgery: international perspectives: AOA critical issues. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(21):e113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Samora JB, Van Heest A, Weber K, Ross W, Huff T, Carter C. Harassment, discrimination, and bullying in orthopaedics: a work environment and culture survey. JAAOS. 2020;28(24):e1097-104. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Whicker E, Williams C, Kirchner G, Khalsa A, Mulcahey MK. What proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons report having been sexually harassed during residency training? A survey study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(11):2598-606. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bohl D, Iantorno SE, Kogan M. Inappropriate questions asked of female orthopaedic surgery applicants from 1971-2015. A cross-sectional study. JAAOS. 2019;27:519-26. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Samora JB, Denning J, Haralabatos S, Luong M, Poon S. Do women experience microaggressions in orthopaedic surgery? Current state and future directions. Curr Orthop Prac. 2020;31(5):503-7. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Weiss J, Teuscher D. What provisions do orthopaedic programs make for maternity, paternity, and adoption leave? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(9):1945-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Nemeth C, Roll E, Mulcahey MK. Program directors' perception of pregnancy and parenthood in orthopedic surgery residency. Orthopedics. 2020;43(2):e109-e113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.O'Connor MI. Medical school experiences shape women students' interest in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(9):1967-72. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Miller EK, LaPorte DM. Barriers to women entering the field of orthopedic surgery. Orthopedics. 2015;38(9):530-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bernstein J, Dicaprio MR, Mehta S. The relationship between required medical school instruction in musculoskeletal medicine and application rates to orthopaedic surgery residency programs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(10):2335-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kroin E, Garbarski D, Shimomura A, Romano J, Schiff A, Wu K. Gender differences in program factors important to applicants when evaluating orthopaedic surgery residency programs. J Grad Med Educ. 2019;11(5):565-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Okike K, Phillips DP, Johnson WA, O'Connor MI. Orthopaedic faculty and resident racial/ethnic diversity is associated with the orthopaedic application rate among underrepresented minority medical students. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28(6):241-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Klyce W, Nhan DT, Dunham AM, El Dafrawy MH, Shannon C, LaPorte DM. The times, they are A-changing: women entering academic orthopedics today are choosing nonpediatric fellowships at a growing rate. J Surg Educ. 2020;77(3):564-71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Rajani R, Haghshenas V, Abalihi N, Tavakoli EM, Zelle BA. Geographic differences in sex and racial distributions among orthopaedic surgery residencies: programs in the South less likely to train women and minorities. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2019;3(2):e004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Kim CY, Sivasundaram L, Trivedi NN, Gilmore A, Gillespie RJ, Salata MJ, Liu RW, Voos JE. A 46-year analysis of gender trends in academic authorship in orthopaedic sports medicine. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;27(13):493-501. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Brown MA, Erdman MK, Munger AM, Miller AN. Despite growing number of women surgeons, authorship gender disparity in orthopaedic literature persists over 30 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(7):1542-52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Rynecki ND, Krell ES, Potter JS, Ranpura A, Beebe KS. How well represented are women orthopaedic surgeons and residents on major orthopaedic editorial boards and publications? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(7):1563-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Chambers CC, Ihnow SB, Monroe EJ, Suleiman LI. Women in orthopaedic surgery: population trends in trainees and practicing surgeons. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(17):e116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Beebe KS, Krell ES, Rynecki ND, Ippolito JA. The effect of sex on orthopaedic surgeon income. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(17):e87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Forrester LA, Seo LJ, Gonzalez LJ, Zhao C, Friedlander S, Chu A. Men receive three times more industry payments than women academic orthopaedic surgeons, even after controlling for confounding variables. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(7):1593-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hill JF, Yule A, Zurakowski D, Day CS. Residents' perceptions of sex diversity in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(19):e1441-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wasserstein AG, Quistberg DA, Shea JA. Mentoring at the university of Pennsylvania: results of a faculty survey. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:210-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Sobel AD, Cox RM, Ashinsky B, Eberson CP, Mulcahey MK. Analysis of factors related to the sex diversity of orthopaedic residency programs in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(11):e79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Okike K, Phillips DP, Swart E, O'Connor MI. Orthopaedic faculty and resident sex diversity are associated with the orthopaedic residency application rate of female medical students. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(12):e56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Saxena S, Cannada LK, Weiss JM. Does the proportion of women in orthopaedic leadership roles reflect the gender composition of specialty societies? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(7):1572-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Gerull KM, Kim DJ, Cogsil T, Rhea L, Cipriano C. Are women proportionately represented as speakers at orthopaedic surgery annual meetings? A cross-sectional analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(12):2729-40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Mason BS, Ross W, Ortega G, Chambers MC, Parks ML. Can a strategic pipeline initiative increase the number of women and underrepresented minorities in orthopaedic surgery? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(9):1979-85. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Vajapey S, Cannada LK, Samora JB. What proportion of women who received funding to attend a Ruth Jackson orthopaedic society meeting pursued a career in orthopaedics? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019;477(7):1722-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from JBJS Open Access are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer Health

RESOURCES