Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 584

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sex Differences in Academic Rank in US Medical Schools in 2014

Open access
Jena, Anupam B., Khullar, Dhruv, Ho, Oliver, Olenski, Andrew R., Blumenthal, Daniel M.·2015·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The proportion of women at the rank of full professor in US medical schools has not increased since 1980 and remains below that of men. Whether differences in age, experience, specialty, and research productivity between sexes explain persistent disparities in faculty rank has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To analyze sex differences in faculty rank among US academic physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed sex differences in faculty rank using a cross-sectional comprehensive database of US physicians with medical school faculty appointments in 2014 (91,073 physicians; 9.1% of all US physicians), linked to information on physician sex, age, years since residency, specialty, authored publications, National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, and clinical trial investigation. We estimated sex differences in full professorship, as well as a combined outcome of associate or full professorship, adjusting for these factors in a multilevel (hierarchical) model. We also analyzed how sex differences varied with specialty and whether differences were more prevalent at schools ranked highly in research. EXPOSURES: Physician sex. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Academic faculty rank. RESULTS: In all, there were 30,464 women who were medical faculty vs 60,609 men. Of those, 3623 women (11.9%) vs 17,354 men (28.6%) had full-professor appointments, for an absolute difference of -16.7% (95% CI, -17.3% to -16.2%). Women faculty were younger and disproportionately represented in internal medicine and pediatrics. The mean total number of publications for women was 11.6 vs 24.8 for men, for a difference of -13.2 (95% CI, -13.6 to -12.7); the mean first- or last-author publications for women was 5.9 vs 13.7 for men, for a difference of -7.8 (95% CI, -8.1 to -7.5). Among 9.1% of medical faculty with an NIH grant, 6.8% (2059 of 30,464) were women and 10.3% (6237 of 60,609) were men, for a difference of -3.5% (95% CI, -3.9% to -3.1%). In all, 6.4% of women vs 8.8% of men had a trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, for a difference of -2.4% (95% CI, -2.8% to -2.0%). After multivariable adjustment, women were less likely than men to have achieved full-professor status (absolute adjusted difference in proportion, -3.8%; 95% CI, -4.4% to -3.3%). Sex-differences in full professorship were present across all specialties and did not vary according to whether a physician's medical school was ranked highly in terms of research funding. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among physicians with faculty appointments at US medical schools, there were sex differences in academic faculty rank, with women substantially less likely than men to be full professors, after accounting for age, experience, specialty, and measures of research productivity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2015.10680

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 584

Metadata

Authors
Jena, A. B., Khullar, D., Ho, O., Olenski, A. R., & Blumenthal, D. M.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2015-09-15
Volume
314
Issue
11
Pages
1149
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1621915916
Cited by
584
References
2
FWCI
111.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sex Differences in Academic Rank in US Medical Schools in 2014. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2015.10680
The paper
Jena, A. B., Khullar, D., Ho, O., Olenski, A. R., & Blumenthal, D. M. (2015). Sex Differences in Academic Rank in US Medical Schools in 2014. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.10680

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.