Sesgos de género en la reumatología española: Percepciones y realidad

Objective

To identify perceptions of gender bias in Spanish rheumatology and to quantify the involvement of both sexes in all areas of the specialty.

Methods

A survey was sent to all members of the SER on participation and perception of biases and of their own competencies, and actual data on participation in governing bodies, congresses, committees, and Spanish rheumatology departments in the last 5 years were reviewed.

Results

The survey was answered by 95 rheumatologist, 4.8% of SER members (14 men and 81 women), both groups being similar in terms of age, academic level, and position and work centre. No differences were detected in the distribution of work and non-work tasks between sexes, nor in invitations to positions of power in the last five years, nor in the perception of capacity to occupy the different positions of power, which was high for both sexes. Male respondents more frequently consider that activities such as participating in a scientific committee or giving a conference are not empowering. A third of both sexes consider that the SER should review its processes with a gender perspective but less than a third believe that this should be done by quotas. The reality of the last 5 years is that 1) there is a male to female ratio of 3:2 on SER boards of directors and in this period there has been no female president or treasurer; 2) in the scientific committees of the congresses men predominate (2:1) although slightly less in the local organizing committee; 3) there are more male speakers and moderators than women (very striking in satellite symposia, 4: 1); 4) 9 out of 10 editors-in-chief are men; 5) in academic positions there are 3 men for every 2 women, 9 to 1 in professorships or emeritus positions; although more women supervise residents; and 6) there are more women (60%) than men (40%) in Spanish rheumatology departments, although 75% of department chiefs are men.

Conclusion

Although not perceived by either the men or the women, there are biases in the involvement of women in important and leadership positions in the specialty.