The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Faculty Promotion in Academic Medicine
Abstract
CONTEXT: Previous studies have suggested that minority medical school faculty are at a disadvantage in promotion opportunities compared with white faculty. OBJECTIVE: To compare promotion rates of minority and white medical school faculty in the United States. DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' Faculty Roster System, the official data system for tracking US medical school faculty. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 50,145 full-time US medical school faculty who became assistant professors or associate professors between 1980 and 1989. Faculty of historically black and Puerto Rican medical schools were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Attainment of associate or full professorship among assistant professors and full professorship among associate professors by 1997, among white, Asian or Pacific Islander (API), underrepresented minority (URM; including black, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, Native American, and Native Alaskan), and other Hispanic faculty. RESULTS: By 1997, 46% of white assistant professors (13,479/28,953) had been promoted, whereas 37% of API (1123/2997; P<.001), 30% of URM (311/1053, P<.001), and 43% of other Hispanic assistant professors (256/598; P =.07) had been promoted. Similarly, by 1997, 50% of white associate professors (7234/14,559) had been promoted, whereas 44% of API (629/1419; P<.001), 36% of URM (101/280; P<.001), and 43% of other Hispanic (122/286; P =.02) associate professors had been promoted. Racial/ethnic disparities in promotion were evident among tenure and nontenure faculty and among faculty who received and did not receive National Institutes of Health research awards. After adjusting for cohort, sex, tenure status, degree, department, medical school type, and receipt of NIH awards, URM faculty remained less likely to be promoted compared with white faculty (relative risk [RR], 0.68 [99% confidence interval CI, 0.59-0.77] for assistant professors and 0.81 [99% CI, 0.65-0.99] for associate professors). API assistant professors also were less likely to be promoted (RR, 0.91 [99% CI, 0.84-0.98]), whereas API associate professors and other Hispanic assistant and associate professors were promoted at comparable rates. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that minority faculty are promoted at lower rates compared with white faculty. JAMA. 2000;284:1085-1092
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Zhang, J., & Yu, K. F. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.19.1690 · Cited by 4,138
Women Physicians in Academic Medicine — New Insights from Cohort Studies
Nonnemaker, L. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200002103420606 · Cited by 490
Promotion of Women Physicians in Academic Medicine
Bland, C. J. (1995) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530140045025 · Cited by 325
Sex Differences in Academic Advancement — Results of a National Study of Pediatricians
Kaplan, S. H., Sullivan, L. M., Dukes, K. A., Phillips, C. F., Kelch, R. P., & Schaller, J. G. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199610243351706 · Cited by 257
Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., & Welch, H. G. (1999) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199907223410411 · Cited by 192
Minority Faculty and Academic Rank in Medicine
Palepu, A. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.9.767 · Cited by 181
Palepu, A., Carr, P. L., Friedman, R. H., Ash, A. S., & Moskowitz, M. A. (2000) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200002000-00014 · Cited by 137
Comparing the Status of Women and Men in Academic Medicine
Carr, P. L., Friedman, R. H., Moskowitz, M. A., & Kazis, L. E. (1993) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-119-9-199311010-00008 · Cited by 127
Carr, P. L., Friedman, R. H., Moskowitz, M. A., Kazis, L. E., & Weed, H. G. (1992) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/bf02599159 · Cited by 75
Time to Shatter the Glass Ceiling for Minority Faculty
Cohen, J. J. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.9.821 · Cited by 69
Cited by
Addressing disparities in academic medicine: what of the minority tax?
Rodríguez, J. E., Campbell, K. M., & Pololi, L. H. (2015) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0290-9 · Cited by 739
Gender Disparity in Citations in High-Impact Journal Articles
Chatterjee, P., & Werner, R. M. (2021) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.14509 · Cited by 367
Theorizing Social Context: Rethinking Behavioral Theory
Burke, N. J., Joseph, G., Pasick, R. J., & Barker, J. C. (2009) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/1090198109335338 · Cited by 294
Price, E. G., Gozu, A., Kern, D. E., Powe, N. R., Wand, G. S., Golden, S., & Cooper, L. A. (2005) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0127.x · Cited by 273
A prescription for cultural competence in medical education
Kripalani, S., Bussey-Jones, J., Katz, M. G., & Genao, I. (2006) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00557.x · Cited by 262
Metadata
- Authors
- Fang, D.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2000-09-06
- Volume
- 284
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1085
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2021982233
- Cited by
- 381
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 7.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Faculty Promotion in Academic Medicine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.284.9.1085
- The paper
- Fang, D. (2000). Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Faculty Promotion in Academic Medicine. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.9.1085
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.