ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Investigating Career Advancement in Academic Cytopathology Workforce: A Gender and Regional Comparison

Paul Z. Chiou,

Corresponding Author

Paul Z. Chiou

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0001-6986-9992

Department of Clinical Laboratory and Medical Imaging, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Correspondence:

Paul Z. Chiou ([email protected])

Search for more papers by this author

Yuane Jia,

Yuane Jia

Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Rema Vinod,

Rema Vinod

Department of Clinical Laboratory and Medical Imaging, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Paul Z. Chiou,

Corresponding Author

Paul Z. Chiou

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0001-6986-9992

Department of Clinical Laboratory and Medical Imaging, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Correspondence:

Paul Z. Chiou ([email protected])

Search for more papers by this author

Yuane Jia,

Yuane Jia

Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Rema Vinod,

Rema Vinod

Department of Clinical Laboratory and Medical Imaging, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 10 April 2025

https://doi.org/10.1111/cyt.13490

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

ABSTRACT

Objective

Using bibliometric analysis to inform factors impacting career mobility, focusing on gender and regional variations in academic cytopathology.

Methods

The Scopus database was used to determine the productivity and experience of cytopathologists who are faculty from the 92 fellowship programs. The dependent variable was promotion to the rank of Professor. A regression analysis was conducted with productivity (h-index), experience (years in publication) and one's geographic work location as covariates to investigate the role of gender in promotion.

Results

The gender distribution is skewed towards females at the Assistant (62.4% vs. 37.58%) and Associate Professors (70.51% vs. 29.49%) levels, but the gap narrows at the full-professor rank (52.98% vs. 47.02%). The regression model showed significant regional variation in promotion for the Southern (0.35; 95% CI, 0.16–0.79; p = 0.012) and Northeastern (0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.57; p = 0.001) regions compared to the West. Active years of publishing (1.18; 95% CI, 1.11–1.27; p < 0.001) and productivity (1.09; 95% CI, 1.06–1.12; p < 0.001) were factors in promotion. The mean HI productivity was comparable between the males and females in the first (4.41 for males and 4.40 for females) and the second decade (13.81 for males and 12.84 for females). However, the gap widened into the third decade (30.27 for males and 26.40 for females), suggesting potential areas for improvement.

Conclusion

While the academic cytopathology workforce is progressing towards gender equity, there is still room for improvement. Our findings suggest that focusing on mid-career professionals(between the second to third decades) by providing additional resources for research and facilitating work–life flexibility can help close the gender gap at the highest level.

Graphical Abstract

While initial research productivity was similar between genders, male cytopathologists showed a slightly faster rate of increase in the second to third decades, followed by a tapering off or decline. Female faculty exhibited a shorter maximum duration of research activity compared to males.

This bibliometric study examined factors in academic cytopathology faculty promotion, revealing a higher proportion of women in lower ranks despite gender not being a significant predictor of promotion. Promotion to full professor was influenced by regional location, publication experience and productivity. The findings suggest that targeted support for mid-career female cytopathologists, focusing on research resources and work–life balance, could further address the observed differences in gender distribution at the highest academic level.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Open Research

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

1R. L. A. Tabarrok, We're Looking at Inequality All Wrong. Just Ask the NFL (Dow Jones & Company, 2024).
Google Scholar
2S. J. Mortensen, E. J. Menard, E. B. Olson, et al., “Characterization of Applicants for Residency Training in Pathology: Does Diversity Exist?,” Annals of Diagnostic Pathology 40 (2019): 23–25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2019.02.010.
10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2019.02.010
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3M. J. White, R. J. Wyse, A. D. Ware, and C. Deville, “Current and Historical Trends in Diversity by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex Within the US Pathology Physician Workforce,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology 154, no. 4 (2020): 450–458, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqaa139.
10.1093/ajcp/aqaa139
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4M. R. George, M. Markwood, and A. M. Rojiani, “The Phenotype of Academic Pathology Chairs,” Academic Pathology 10, no. 1 (2023): 100061, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acpath.2022.100061.
10.1016/j.acpath.2022.100061
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5A. Hempenstall, J. Tomlinson, and M. M. Bismark, “Gender Inequity in Medicine and Medical Leadership,” Medical Journal of Australia 211, no. 10 (2019): 475, https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50388.
10.5694/mja2.50388
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6M. A. Nguyen, S. Yousef, R. Gupta, and C. McKenzie, “Gender Distribution in Surgical Pathology Journal Publications and Editorial Boards,” Journal of Clinical Pathology 77, no. 4 (2024): 219–224, https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp-2023-208915.
10.1136/jcp-2023-208915
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7M. F. Lipscomb, D. N. Bailey, L. P. Howell, et al., “Women in Academic Pathology: Pathways to Department Chair,” Academic Pathology 8 (2021): 23742895211010322, https://doi.org/10.1177/23742895211010322.
10.1177/23742895211010322
Google Scholar
8S. E. Wobker, P. S. Ginter, C. Parra-Herran, et al., “Recognition Awards in Pathology Specialty Societies,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology 158, no. 4 (2022): 499–505, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqac076.
10.1093/ajcp/aqac076
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9J. R. Barner, M. J. Holosko, B. A. Thyer, and S. King, Jr., “Research Productivity in Top-Ranked Schools in Psychology and Social Work: Does Having a Research Culture Matter?,” Journal of Social Work Education 51, no. 1 (2015): 5–18.
10.1080/10437797.2015.977123
Google Scholar
10T. E. Carter, T. E. Smith, and P. J. Osteen, “Gender Comparisons of Social Work Faculty Using H-Index Scores,” Scientometrics 111 (2017): 1547–1557.
10.1007/s11192-017-2287-0
Web of Science® Google Scholar
11B. M. Benway, P. Kalidas, J. M. Cabello, and S. B. Bhayani, “Does Citation Analysis Reveal Association Between H-Index and Academic Rank in Urology?,” Urology 74, no. 1 (2009): 30–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.10.045.
10.1016/j.urology.2008.10.045
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12J. A. Eloy, P. Svider, S. S. Chandrasekhar, et al., “Gender Disparities in Scholarly Productivity Within Academic Otolaryngology Departments,” Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery 148, no. 2 (2013): 215–222, https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599812466055.
10.1177/0194599812466055
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13P. S. Pagel and J. A. Hudetz, “H-Index Is a Sensitive Indicator of Academic Activity in Highly Productive Anaesthesiologists: Results of a Bibliometric Analysis,” Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 55, no. 9 (2011): 1085–1089, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02508.x.
10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02508.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14M. R. Quigley, E. B. Holliday, C. D. Fuller, M. Choi, and C. R. Thomas, Jr., “Distribution of the H-Index in Radiation Oncology Conforms to a Variation of Power Law: Implications for Assessing Academic Productivity,” Journal of Cancer Education 27, no. 3 (2012): 463–466, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-012-0363-y.
10.1007/s13187-012-0363-y
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15 Genderize.io.roskilde, “Denmark: Demografix ApS,” accessed September 11, 2024, https://genderize.io/.
Google Scholar
16V. Misra, F. Safi, K. A. Brewerton, et al., “Gender Disparity Between Authors in Leading Medical Journals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Review,” BMJ Open 11, no. 7 (2021): e051224, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051224.
10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051224
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17M. E. Purdy, B. N. Zmuda, A. M. Owens, et al., “Gender Differences in Publication in Emergency Medicine Journals,” American Journal of Emergency Medicine 49 (2021): 338–342, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2021.06.039.
10.1016/j.ajem.2021.06.039
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18S. Shah, N. B. Shumway, E. W. Sarvis, et al., “Gender Parity in Geriatrics Editorial Boards,” Geriatrics 7, no. 5 (2022): 90, https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics7050090.
10.3390/geriatrics7050090
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19M. R. Brown, C. Tay, J. W. Jacobs, and G. S. Booth, “Women Physicians in Academic Pathology Leadership,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology 161, no. 3 (2024): 305–310, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqad151.
10.1093/ajcp/aqad151
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20J. W. Jacobs, R. Jagsi, F. C. Stanford, et al., “Gender Representation Among United States Medical Board Leadership,” Journal of Women's Health (2002) 31, no. 12 (2022): 1710–1718, https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2022.0271.
10.1089/jwh.2022.0271
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21S. R. Patel, F. St Pierre, A. I. Velazquez, et al., “The Matilda Effect: Underrecognition of Women in Hematology and Oncology Awards,” Oncologist 26, no. 9 (2021): 779–786, https://doi.org/10.1002/onco.13871.
10.1002/onco.13871
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22M. Verduzco-Gutierrez, N. B. Katz, T. K. Fleming, et al., “Author Diversity on Clinical Practice Guideline Committees,” American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 101, no. 5 (2022): 493–503, https://doi.org/10.1097/phm.0000000000001932.
10.1097/PHM.0000000000001932
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23J. W. Jacobs, A. A. Martin, A. R. Larson, E. A. Gehrie, J. K. Silver, and G. S. Booth, “Analysis of Industry-Related Payments Among Physician Editors of Pathology Journals,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology 159 (2023): 172–180, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqac147.
10.1093/ajcp/aqac147
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24 Bureau UC, “Census Regions and Divisions of the United States,” accessed February 28, 2024, https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf.
Google Scholar
25P. Z. Chiou and Y. Jia, “Influence of Certification on a Pathology Laboratory Professional's Career Mobility,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology 157, no. 6 (2022): 942–947, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqab205.
10.1093/ajcp/aqab205
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26P. L. Carr, A. S. Ash, R. H. Friedman, et al., “Relation of Family Responsibilities and Gender to the Productivity and Career Satisfaction of Medical Faculty,” Annals of Internal Medicine 129, no. 7 (1998): 532–538, https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-129-7-199810010-00004.
10.7326/0003-4819-129-7-199810010-00004
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27P. Z. Chiou, “Exploring Staff Turnover, Burnout, and Resilience in Cytology Reference Laboratories: A Workforce Qualitative Study,” Cytopathology 32, no. 6 (2021): 738–750, https://doi.org/10.1111/cyt.13024.
10.1111/cyt.13024
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28P. Z. Chiou, “Human Sustainability in Pathology Medical Laboratory Workforce,” Journal of Allied Health 51, no. 3 (2022): 229–233.
PubMed Google Scholar
29W. Levinson, S. W. Tolle, and C. Lewis, “Women in Academic Medicine. Combining Career and Family,” New England Journal of Medicine 321, no. 22 (1989): 1511–1517, https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198911303212205.
10.1056/NEJM198911303212205
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30D. A. Reed, F. Enders, R. Lindor, M. McClees, and K. D. Lindor, “Gender Differences in Academic Productivity and Leadership Appointments of Physicians Throughout Academic Careers,” Academic Medicine 86, no. 1 (2011): 43–47, https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ff9ff2.
10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ff9ff2
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31P. A. Ferrada, R. J. Anand, and A. Grover, “Virginia Commonwealth University: Committed to the Professional Growth of Women in Surgery,” American Surgeon 77, no. 11 (2011): 1430–1431.
10.1177/000313481107701125
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
32J. H. McCord, R. McDonald, R. S. Sippel, G. Leverson, D. M. Mahvi, and S. M. Weber, “Surgical Career Choices: The Vital Impact of Mentoring,” Journal of Surgical Research 155, no. 1 (2009): 136–141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2008.06.048.
10.1016/j.jss.2008.06.048
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33A. D. Wyrzykowski, E. Han, B. J. Pettitt, T. M. Styblo, and G. S. Rozycki, “A Profile of Female Academic Surgeons: Training, Credentials, and Academic Success,” American Surgeon 72, no. 12 (2006): 1153–1157, discussion 1158–9.
10.1177/000313480607201201
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34L. M. Colletti, M. W. Mulholland, and S. S. Sonnad, “Perceived Obstacles to Career Success for Women in Academic Surgery,” Archives of Surgery 135, no. 8 (2000): 972–977, https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.135.8.972.
10.1001/archsurg.135.8.972
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35R. B. Kass, W. W. Souba, and L. E. Thorndyke, “Challenges Confronting Female Surgical Leaders: Overcoming the Barriers,” Journal of Surgical Research 132, no. 2 (2006): 179–187, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.02.009.
10.1016/j.jss.2006.02.009
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36C. M. Saunders, A. Nichevich, and C. Ellis, “Frontiers in Academic Surgery: The Five M'S,” ANZ Journal of Surgery 78, no. 5 (2008): 350–355, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04473.x.
10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04473.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37Y. Zhuge, J. Kaufman, D. M. Simeone, H. Chen, and O. C. Velazquez, “Is There Still a Glass Ceiling for Women in Academic Surgery?,” Annals of Surgery 253, no. 4 (2011): 637–643, https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182111120.
10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182111120
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38R. Jagsi, A. R. Motomura, K. A. Griffith, S. Rangarajan, and P. A. Ubel, “Sex Differences in Attainment of Independent Funding by Career Development Awardees,” Annals of Internal Medicine 151, no. 11 (2009): 804–811, https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-11-200912010-00009.
10.7326/0003-4819-151-11-200912010-00009
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39L. Geraci, S. Balsis, and A. J. B. Busch, “Gender and the H Index in Psychology,” Scientometrics 105 (2015): 2023–2034.
10.1007/s11192-015-1757-5
Web of Science® Google Scholar
40K. P. Richter, L. Clark, J. A. Wick, et al., “Women Physicians and Promotion in Academic Medicine,” New England Journal of Medicine 383, no. 22 (2020): 2148–2157, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1916935.
10.1056/NEJMsa1916935
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
41J. A. Eloy, L. J. Mady, P. F. Svider, et al., “Regional Differences in Gender Promotion and Scholarly Productivity in Otolaryngology,” Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery 150, no. 3 (2014): 371–377, https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599813515183.
10.1177/0194599813515183
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
42P. F. Svider, L. J. Mady, Q. Husain, et al., “Geographic Differences in Academic Promotion Practices, Fellowship Training, and Scholarly Impact,” American Journal of Otolaryngology 34, no. 5 (2013): 464–470, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2013.04.003.
10.1016/j.amjoto.2013.04.003
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
43J. K. Silver, R. Ghalib, J. A. Poorman, et al., “Analysis of Gender Equity in Leadership of Physician-Focused Medical Specialty Societies, 2008–2017,” JAMA Internal Medicine 179, no. 3 (2019): 433–435, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5303.
10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5303
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Early View

Online Version of Record before inclusion in an issue