Results showed that professional development preferences included stable hours, family friendliness, female friendliness, the availability of positive role models, financial benefits, professional challenges, patient focus and the opportunity to have a stimulating career. When asked about perceptions of cardiology, the top responses were adverse job conditions, interference with family life and a lack of diversity.

Women and residents not choosing cardiology valued work-life balance more highly and had more negative perceptions of cardiology than men or future cardiologists, who emphasized the professional advantages available in cardiology. Professional development factors and cardiology perceptions were strongly associated with a decision to pursue or avoid a career in cardiology in both men and women.

“Unfortunately, we found that trainees perceive that the things they want most from their professional lives are often characteristics that they see as foreign to cardiology. This is sobering,” says Pamela S. Douglas, MD, MACC, lead author of the paper and chair of ACC’s Diversity and Inclusion Task Force. “To continue to attract top talent, the cardiology profession needs to address the negative perceptions of the field, including the reality underneath those perceptions. This is especially needed to attract women into our overwhelming male profession — a key consideration since about half of all residents are female.”

"Unfortunately, we found that trainees perceive that the things they want most from their professional lives are often characteristics that they see as foreign to cardiology. This is sobering." — Pamela S. Douglas, MD, MACC

In a related editorial comment, Anne B. Curtis, MD, FACC, and Fatima Rodriguez, MD, FACC, explain that an organized and sustained effort by professional societies in cardiology “is necessary to draw attention to this problem.” They add that “structured programs that provide role models and mentors to medical students and residents are needed … [and] efforts to increase diversity in cardiology should focus on the excellence it creates in the workplace. Finally, both conscious and unconscious barriers to women in cardiology must be recognized and addressed.”

Regarding sex-based discrimination women face in cardiology, Roxana Mehran, MD, FACC, chair of ACC’s Interventional Section, notes in a viewpoint also published in JAMA Cardiology, that she does not “know of a single woman who has trained in cardiology and chosen interventional cardiology as her career who has not faced some level of sexual harassment or misconduct.” She explains that “Never again should anyone feel uncomfortable in the work place and intimidated into feeling inferior by the powers that be. We must find the tools to encourage talented women to become interventional cardiologists. If we do not, then nothing will change.”

In another viewpoint, Rashmee U. Shah, MD, MS, member of ACC’s Cardiovascular Disease in Women Committee, acknowledges the wage inequality that exists in cardiology and explains “over a 35-year career, the woman will earn $2.5 million less than the man.” She concludes that “We have arrived at a moment when change is within arm’s reach; women and men must rally together to make the workplace fair, more productive, and better for everyone.”

<<< Return to top

According to Albert, lack of racial/ethnic diversity, racial/ethnic discrimination from parents and families, bias from superiors and colleagues, hypervigilance from stereotype threat, and reactions to tokenism are among the drivers of isolation felt by under-represented minorities, especially women. She also notes that women are “more frequently faced with insufficient family resources/wealth to help manage family-work conflicts,” as well as limited mentorship and leadership opportunities.

An authentic approach to diversity and inclusion is paramount to not only ensuring the success and professional well-being of under-represented minorities and women today, but in also building an equitable pipeline of future leaders, Albert writes. She recommends that institutional and organizational leaders be required to champion diversity and inclusion and evaluated on their results. She also suggests the creation of hybrid career opportunities that “interdigitate academics with private practice.” Other recommendations include bias training and identification, creation and nurturing of peer networks, and diversity funding targeted at under-represented minority well-being.

“Albert’s #MeWho article serves as a great reminder of why a comprehensive approach to diversity and inclusion is so critical for not only cardiology, but medicine as a whole,” says Pamela S. Douglas, MD, MACC, chair of ACC’s Diversity and Inclusion Task Force. “The ACC has developed a Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan that gets at the core of many of Albert’s recommendations. Our goal: to harness the power of the diversity of ACC members to advance patient care, spur innovation, and improve health equity among individual patients and populations. In doing so, ACC will ensure opportunity for all cardiovascular providers by working towards a fully inclusive organization and profession.”

<<< Return to top

• Advocate for institutional and departmental policies to make more transparent the criteria for physician compensation.
• Advocate “for equal base pay based on objective criteria.”
• Work to promote bias and compensation determination training for people in positions to decide physician compensation.
• Promote “a specified approach, sufficient to identify gender disparity, to oversight of compensation models, metrics and actual total compensation for all employed physicians.”
• Begin educational programs to help all physicians negotiate equitable compensation.

Read more about the ACC’s Diversity and Inclusion Initiative in the June issue of Cardiology (ACC.org/Cardiology). Additional information is also available at ACC.org/Diversity.

<<< Return to top

Researchers examined the numbers of women and men who participated in cardiovascular trials submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supporting new drug application approvals. Between Jan. 1, 2005 and Sept. 15, 2015, 36 approvals of 35 drugs for acute coronary syndrome/myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease including angina, heart failure, hypertension and pulmonary arterial hypertension were reviewed.

Estimates for the participation of women were calculated by dividing the percentage of women among trial participants by the percentage of women in the disease population, with a range between 0.8 and 1.2 reflecting proportional representation. In total, the proportion of women enrolled ranged from 22 to 81 percent, with a mean of 46 percent.

The ratio for atrial fibrillation was 0.8-1.1, 0.9 for hypertension and 1.4 for pulmonary arterial hypertension – all within or above the desirable range. Heart failure, coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome/myocardial infarction were all under the desired ratio level, at 0.5-0.6, 0.6 and 0.6, respectively. Researchers also looked at sex differences in efficacy or safety, but found little indication of clinically meaningful differences.

According to the researchers, previous studies have suggested that clinical trial inclusion and exclusion criteria disproportionately exclude women from cardiovascular studies. However, data in this latest study show that the lower enrollment of women reflects the lower number of women referred for pretrial participation screening. Factors prior to screening, such as the identification of potential trial participants and the ability of a candidate to participate, may be more likely reasons for low enrollment of women.

“Based on this work, future research is needed to identify factors leading to under participation of women in cardiovascular clinical trials, particularly those occurring before screening,” writes Pamela Scott, PhD, first author and director of research in the FDA Office of Women’s Health. “Research is needed to better define barriers that limit participation of diverse populations, not only of women but of minority and older populations.”

<<< Return to top