Introduction:

Achieving gender equity in medicine is an ongoing goal for professional organizations and residency programs, especially for traditionally male-dominated fields such as urology. Although there is an increasing trend in the number of women choosing to pursue surgical residencies, women only comprise 9% of practicing urologists. To attract a diverse pool of physicians to the field of urologic oncology, a culture of leadership and representation to support and engage the pipeline of women entering academia is vital. In order to evaluate multidisciplinary female representation at urologic oncology conferences, we reviewed speakership trends at contemporary Society of Urologic Oncology (SUO) and American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary Symposium (GU-ASCO) annual meetings.

Methods:

A retrospective audit was performed of two contemporary urologic oncology-specific meetings. We collected the names of all oral session presenters and moderators at SUO and GU-ASCO conferences from 2015 to 2019, including all panel moderators, as well as invited, keynote, and plenary presenters. Data abstracted on all SUO presentations since 2015 included name of speaker, program and session chair name, session title, panel size, and type of presentation. Author biographical information including gender, specialty (medical oncology, urology, radiation oncology, scientist, or other), number of degrees, and year of graduation from medical/graduate school were obtained from a query of institutional websites, social and professional media platforms, such as LinkedIn, Doximity, and U.S. News & World Report. Statistical analyses were performed to assess for differences and relationships between male and female authorship based on gender, specialty, professional, and educational factors.

Results:

We identified 1,102 speakers at genitourinary oncology conferences. Overall, 222 (20%) were female. There was no significant difference between female speakership rates at SUO and GU-ASCO (114/596, 19.1% vs. 108/506, 20.7%, p=0.36). There was an increasing proportion of women presenters in more recent conference years (Table 1, p=0.009). This observation was reinforced on multivariable regression analyses (OR 1.31, p=0.009, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.62). Upon Cochran-Armitage testing to assess for a trend over time, a positive trend in female authorship was noted (p=0.026). Several professional and educational differences were noted between genders. Female speakers were more likely to be medical oncologists (p<0.001), have more recent years of graduation (2001 vs. 1996, p<0.001), hold an additional advanced degree (OR 2.09, p=0.005), and speak in sessions where other women served as chair (OR 1.42, p=0.044). Conversely, female speakers had lower odds of delivering a plenary or keynote address (OR 0.28, p=0.015).

Conclusion:

We identified a significantly positive trend towards increased female representation within contemporary genitourinary conferences over time; these trends did not remain significant when analyzing each meeting separately. Several important differences between men and women speakers were identified: women were more likely to hold a second degree, yet were less likely to be a plenary or keynote speaker, and no women were identified as program chairs. Committee composition, specifically inclusion of a female as a session chair, was highly predictive of female speakership, highlighting the importance of female leadership as a potential strategy to minimize gender bias within subspecialty meetings. Our data suggests that inclusion of women in planning committees may help reduce gender disparities and promote diversity within urologic oncology.

Funding: N/A