Equity and diversity in the nephrology workforce in Australia and New Zealand.
ethnicity
female
male
personnel
sex factors
sexism/psychology/*statistics & numerical data
Journal
Internal medicine journal
ISSN: 1445-5994
Titre abrégé: Intern Med J
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101092952
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2022
11 2022
Historique:
revised:
22
03
2022
received:
13
09
2021
accepted:
29
03
2022
pubmed:
7
4
2022
medline:
23
11
2022
entrez:
6
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite diversity initiatives, inequities persist in medicine with negative implications for the workforce and patients. Little is known about workplace inequity in nephrology. To describe perceptions and experiences of bias by health professionals in the Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology (ANZSN), focussing on gender and race. A web-based survey of ANZSN members recorded degree of perceived inequity on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (none) to 5 (complete). Groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U-test and logistic regression. Comments were synthesised using qualitative methods to explore themes of inequity and pathways to an inclusive future. Of the 620 members of the ANZSN, there were 134 (22%) respondents, of whom 57% were women and 67% were White. The majority (88%) perceived inequities in the workforce. Perceived drivers of inequity were gender (84/113; 75%), carer responsibilities (74/113; 65%) and race (64/113; 56%). Half (74/131) had personally experienced inequity, based on gender in 70% (52/74) and race in 39% (29/75) with perceived discrimination coming from doctors, patients, academics and health administrators. White males were least likely (odds ratio 0.39; 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.90) to experience inequity. Dominant themes from qualitative analysis indicated that the major impacts of inequity were limited opportunities for advancement and lack of formal assistance for those experiencing inequities. Proposed solutions to reduce inequity included normalising the discourse on inequity at an organisational level, with policy changes to ensure diverse representation on committees and in executive leadership positions. Inequity, particularly driven by gender and race, is common for nephrology health professionals in Australia and New Zealand and impacts career progression.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Despite diversity initiatives, inequities persist in medicine with negative implications for the workforce and patients. Little is known about workplace inequity in nephrology.
AIM
To describe perceptions and experiences of bias by health professionals in the Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology (ANZSN), focussing on gender and race.
METHODS
A web-based survey of ANZSN members recorded degree of perceived inequity on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (none) to 5 (complete). Groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U-test and logistic regression. Comments were synthesised using qualitative methods to explore themes of inequity and pathways to an inclusive future.
RESULTS
Of the 620 members of the ANZSN, there were 134 (22%) respondents, of whom 57% were women and 67% were White. The majority (88%) perceived inequities in the workforce. Perceived drivers of inequity were gender (84/113; 75%), carer responsibilities (74/113; 65%) and race (64/113; 56%). Half (74/131) had personally experienced inequity, based on gender in 70% (52/74) and race in 39% (29/75) with perceived discrimination coming from doctors, patients, academics and health administrators. White males were least likely (odds ratio 0.39; 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.90) to experience inequity. Dominant themes from qualitative analysis indicated that the major impacts of inequity were limited opportunities for advancement and lack of formal assistance for those experiencing inequities. Proposed solutions to reduce inequity included normalising the discourse on inequity at an organisational level, with policy changes to ensure diverse representation on committees and in executive leadership positions.
CONCLUSIONS
Inequity, particularly driven by gender and race, is common for nephrology health professionals in Australia and New Zealand and impacts career progression.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35384220
doi: 10.1111/imj.15768
pmc: PMC9796933
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1900-1909Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Internal Medicine Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Physicians.
Références
JAMA. 2021 Aug 17;326(7):621-627
pubmed: 34402850
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 Sep 6;14(9):1399-1401
pubmed: 31350274
J Exp Soc Psychol. 2017 Sep;72:133-146
pubmed: 29225371
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 9;109(41):16474-9
pubmed: 22988126
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2022 Jan 1;30(1):7-18
pubmed: 34077398
Science. 2011 Aug 19;333(6045):1015-9
pubmed: 21852498
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021 Sep;9(9):556-559
pubmed: 34332698
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018 Nov 7;13(11):1755-1756
pubmed: 30348814
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Jul 3;2(7):e196545
pubmed: 31276177
Transplantation. 2017 Oct;101(10):2266-2270
pubmed: 28767533
Health Aff (Millwood). 2002 Sep-Oct;21(5):90-102
pubmed: 12224912
JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Sep 1;176(9):1294-304
pubmed: 27400435
Heart. 2021 Jun;107(11):895-901
pubmed: 33722825
Science. 2008 Dec 5;322(5907):1472-4
pubmed: 19056961
JAMA. 2021 Aug 17;326(7):671-672
pubmed: 34402840
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015 Mar 1;191(5):514-21
pubmed: 25584658