The Library
Glass cliff effect in transplantation – myth or reality?
Tools
Krishnan, Nithya, Biggerstaff, Deborah, Raymond, Neil, Dolton, Monica, Braun, Hillary, Livingstone, Sondra, Hattersley, John G., Eris, Josette, Ascher, Nancy, Higgins, Rob, Wood, Kathryn and Szczepura, Ala (2016) Glass cliff effect in transplantation – myth or reality? In: 26th International Congress of the Transplantation Society; Symposium on Women in Transplantation, Hong Kong, 18-23 Aug 2016. Published in: Transplantation, 100 (7). S927. doi:10.1097/01.tp.0000490147.72544.1a ISSN 0041-1337.
PDF
WRAP_Are_women_transplant_leadership.pdf - Accepted Version Embargoed item. Restricted access to Repository staff only - Requires a PDF viewer. Download (104Kb) |
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.tp.0000490147.72544.1a
Abstract
Introduction: It is well known that representation of women in many fields of medicine is much lower than men1 and historically, gender has precluded females from becoming leaders in some fields. This ‘glass-ceiling’ effect is recognised to be more prevalent in male-dominated specialities with fewer women in senior positions. Transplantation is one such area. Moreover, studies in other professions show that women who reach a senior position can easily fall from a position of leadership because of a single mistake 2. To date, there have been no studies in transplantation looking at this ‘glass cliff’ effect.
Aim: To investigate if there is any difference in perception regarding wrong decisions made by senior medical staff in transplant leadership roles, based on gender.
Methodology: Ethical approval was obtained from West Midlands Research Ethics Committee, U.K and Biomedical and Scientific Research Ethics Committee, University of Warwick, U.K.
The study was a prospective web-based survey involving five clinical scenarios, with either a male or female protagonist (Set1 and Set2). Each scenario was followed by two questions (i) rating of clinical performance (score from 1 to 10, where 1= unacceptable and 10 = exemplary) and (ii) action to be taken based on clinical performance (no action; informal action; written report to department; written report to national regulatory body).
To ensure elimination of any inherent biases in responses the survey was advertised as a study exploring whether adequate actions are taken following adverse clinical incidents in transplantation. Participants were recruited by advertising through the websites of various professional bodies. Individuals were randomly assigned to either Set1 or Set2 questionnaires, with each Set receiving the same scenarios in the same order, differing only in whether a male or female protagonist was mentioned.
Results: 189 invitees responded; 55 did not complete any questions and were excluded from the main analysis, leaving 134 (64 Set1 and 70 Set2) completed questionnaires. Comparison of respondent characteristics showed no significant differences between the two randomly allocated Sets with respect to age group, gender, ethnicity, country and respondent status.
Mean clinical performance scores in each of the Scenarios 1 to 5 between Set1 versus Set2 were not statistically significant. Analysing grouped scores using chi squared tests similarly found no significant differences between Sets. There were no significant differences between Sets with regards to actions or grouped actions.
Analysis of the Sets versus clinical performance groups and action within gender defined groups also showed no significant difference between the Sets.
Conclusions: Overall there was little evidence to suggest any differences in responses between Set1 and Set2. Thus, this study did not find any quantitative evidence of gender bias in the assessment of either clinical performance scores or recommended actions. However, since 29% of responses were incomplete, this raises the question of the degree to which this result can be generalized and whether responses are truly representative. Qualitative analysis on participants’ comments will be forthcoming
Item Type: | Conference Item (Paper) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Divisions: | Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School | ||||
Journal or Publication Title: | Transplantation | ||||
Publisher: | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins | ||||
ISSN: | 0041-1337 | ||||
Official Date: | July 2016 | ||||
Dates: |
|
||||
Volume: | 100 | ||||
Number: | 7 | ||||
Page Range: | S927 | ||||
DOI: | 10.1097/01.tp.0000490147.72544.1a | ||||
Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||
Publication Status: | Published | ||||
Access rights to Published version: | Restricted or Subscription Access | ||||
Date of first compliant deposit: | 26 August 2016 | ||||
Conference Paper Type: | Paper | ||||
Title of Event: | 26th International Congress of the Transplantation Society; Symposium on Women in Transplantation | ||||
Type of Event: | Conference | ||||
Location of Event: | Hong Kong | ||||
Date(s) of Event: | 18-23 Aug 2016 |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
View Item |