英国泌尿外科医师协会(BAUS)年度会议上的种族和性别趋势:13年(2009-2021)期间BAUS项目的回顾

IF 0.2 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Clinical Urology Pub Date : 2022-07-15 DOI:10.1177/20514158221101760
V. Massella, M. Sinha, A. Pietropaolo, R. Geraghty, Miss Jo Cresswell, J. Philip, N. Shrotri, B. Somani
{"title":"英国泌尿外科医师协会(BAUS)年度会议上的种族和性别趋势:13年(2009-2021)期间BAUS项目的回顾","authors":"V. Massella, M. Sinha, A. Pietropaolo, R. Geraghty, Miss Jo Cresswell, J. Philip, N. Shrotri, B. Somani","doi":"10.1177/20514158221101760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In this paper, we wanted to review the annual British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) programme to analyse the female and ethnic minority (EM) representation and find out whether there is ethnic and gender disparity, and if it does reflect the reality of the workforce. Methods: To investigate gender and EM representation, we requested data for BAUS annual meetings over a 13-year period (2009–2021). All speakers and chairpersons for all four sub-sections including Endourology, Oncology, Andrology and Female, Neurological and Urodynamic urology (FNUU) were collated. We also looked at the geographic distribution of the speakers (London area, rest of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales). Data were analysed separately before and after the COVID-19 pandemic (cut-off March 2020), as in the latter 2 years, the meeting was held virtually. Results: A total of 2569 speakers (range: 135–323 speakers/year) were included in our analysis and 2187 (85%) speakers were from the United Kingdom. Of the UK speakers, more than three-quarters (76.6%, n = 1676) were males and females of White ethnicity and (23.4%, n = 511) were EM. The vast majority of speakers throughout the years were males (86%, n = 1891) with only 14% (n = 296) females regardless of their origin and ethnicity. The presence of EM females was only 1.9% (n = 43). The percentage of female representation rose consistently over time from 6.7% (n = 8) in 2009 to 21.1% (n = 44) in 2020, suggesting an upward trend. Regional distribution showed 31%, 63%, 3.6%, 1.6% and 0.2% from London, Rest of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, respectively. Both gender and EM representation doubled in the last 2 years during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Annual BAUS meetings have seen a higher proportion of ethnic and gender representation in recent years. However, considering the workforce within urology, more needs to be done to address this historical disparity. Hopefully, the BAUS 10-point programme will provide a framework for addressing Equality, Diversity and Inclusion issues related to this bias. Level of evidence: Not applicable.","PeriodicalId":15471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Urology","volume":"16 1","pages":"181 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethnic and gender trends at the annual British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) meeting: A review of BAUS programmes over a 13-year period (2009–2021)\",\"authors\":\"V. Massella, M. Sinha, A. Pietropaolo, R. Geraghty, Miss Jo Cresswell, J. Philip, N. Shrotri, B. Somani\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20514158221101760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: In this paper, we wanted to review the annual British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) programme to analyse the female and ethnic minority (EM) representation and find out whether there is ethnic and gender disparity, and if it does reflect the reality of the workforce. Methods: To investigate gender and EM representation, we requested data for BAUS annual meetings over a 13-year period (2009–2021). All speakers and chairpersons for all four sub-sections including Endourology, Oncology, Andrology and Female, Neurological and Urodynamic urology (FNUU) were collated. We also looked at the geographic distribution of the speakers (London area, rest of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales). Data were analysed separately before and after the COVID-19 pandemic (cut-off March 2020), as in the latter 2 years, the meeting was held virtually. Results: A total of 2569 speakers (range: 135–323 speakers/year) were included in our analysis and 2187 (85%) speakers were from the United Kingdom. Of the UK speakers, more than three-quarters (76.6%, n = 1676) were males and females of White ethnicity and (23.4%, n = 511) were EM. The vast majority of speakers throughout the years were males (86%, n = 1891) with only 14% (n = 296) females regardless of their origin and ethnicity. The presence of EM females was only 1.9% (n = 43). The percentage of female representation rose consistently over time from 6.7% (n = 8) in 2009 to 21.1% (n = 44) in 2020, suggesting an upward trend. Regional distribution showed 31%, 63%, 3.6%, 1.6% and 0.2% from London, Rest of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, respectively. Both gender and EM representation doubled in the last 2 years during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Annual BAUS meetings have seen a higher proportion of ethnic and gender representation in recent years. However, considering the workforce within urology, more needs to be done to address this historical disparity. Hopefully, the BAUS 10-point programme will provide a framework for addressing Equality, Diversity and Inclusion issues related to this bias. Level of evidence: Not applicable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Urology\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"181 - 189\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20514158221101760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20514158221101760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在本文中,我们想回顾英国泌尿外科医师协会(BAUS)的年度计划,以分析女性和少数民族(EM)的代表性,并了解是否存在种族和性别差异,以及它是否反映了劳动力的现实。方法:为了调查性别和少数民族代表性,我们要求获得13年(2009-2011年)BAUS年会的数据。对所有四个子部分的所有演讲者和主持人进行了整理,包括内泌尿外科、肿瘤学、男科和女性、神经病学和泌尿动力学泌尿外科(FNUU)。我们还研究了演讲者的地理分布(伦敦地区、英格兰其他地区、苏格兰、北爱尔兰和威尔士)。新冠肺炎大流行前后(截止2020年3月)分别分析了数据,因为在后两年,会议是虚拟举行的。结果:我们的分析共包括2569名发言人(范围:135-323名发言人/年),2187名发言人(85%)来自英国。在讲英国语的人中,超过四分之三(76.6%,n=1676)是白人的男性和女性,(23.4%,n=511)是EM。这些年来,绝大多数讲英语的人是男性(86%,n=1891),只有14%(n=296)是女性,无论其出身和种族如何。EM女性仅占1.9%(n=43)。女性代表的比例随着时间的推移不断上升,从2009年的6.7%(n=8)上升到2020年的21.1%(n=44),这表明有上升趋势。伦敦、英格兰其他地区、苏格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰的地区分布分别为31%、63%、3.6%、1.6%和0.2%。在过去两年的疫情期间,性别和少数民族的代表性都翻了一番(p<0.001)。结论:近年来,BAUS年度会议的种族和性别代表性比例更高。然而,考虑到泌尿外科的劳动力,需要做更多的工作来解决这一历史差异。希望BAUS的10点计划将为解决与这种偏见有关的平等、多样性和包容性问题提供一个框架。证据级别:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ethnic and gender trends at the annual British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) meeting: A review of BAUS programmes over a 13-year period (2009–2021)
Objective: In this paper, we wanted to review the annual British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) programme to analyse the female and ethnic minority (EM) representation and find out whether there is ethnic and gender disparity, and if it does reflect the reality of the workforce. Methods: To investigate gender and EM representation, we requested data for BAUS annual meetings over a 13-year period (2009–2021). All speakers and chairpersons for all four sub-sections including Endourology, Oncology, Andrology and Female, Neurological and Urodynamic urology (FNUU) were collated. We also looked at the geographic distribution of the speakers (London area, rest of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales). Data were analysed separately before and after the COVID-19 pandemic (cut-off March 2020), as in the latter 2 years, the meeting was held virtually. Results: A total of 2569 speakers (range: 135–323 speakers/year) were included in our analysis and 2187 (85%) speakers were from the United Kingdom. Of the UK speakers, more than three-quarters (76.6%, n = 1676) were males and females of White ethnicity and (23.4%, n = 511) were EM. The vast majority of speakers throughout the years were males (86%, n = 1891) with only 14% (n = 296) females regardless of their origin and ethnicity. The presence of EM females was only 1.9% (n = 43). The percentage of female representation rose consistently over time from 6.7% (n = 8) in 2009 to 21.1% (n = 44) in 2020, suggesting an upward trend. Regional distribution showed 31%, 63%, 3.6%, 1.6% and 0.2% from London, Rest of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, respectively. Both gender and EM representation doubled in the last 2 years during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Annual BAUS meetings have seen a higher proportion of ethnic and gender representation in recent years. However, considering the workforce within urology, more needs to be done to address this historical disparity. Hopefully, the BAUS 10-point programme will provide a framework for addressing Equality, Diversity and Inclusion issues related to this bias. Level of evidence: Not applicable.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Urology
Journal of Clinical Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic value of the abnormal digital rectal examination in the modern MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Comparison of the diagnostic utility of CHOKAI, STONE and STONE PLUS scores in predicting ureteral stones larger than 5 mm Quality of life and healthcare resource use in patients with bladder pain syndrome: A survey of UK patients Analysis of the learning curve for Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for a single surgeon Effectiveness of intravesical glycosaminoglycans in the treatment of recurrent urinary tract infections: Systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1