The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Women Physicians in Academic Medicine — New Insights from Cohort Studies
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: I conducted a study to determine whether women who graduate from medical schools are more or less likely than their male counterparts to pursue full-time careers in academic medicine and to advance to the senior ranks of medical school faculties. METHODS: The rates of advancement to the ranks of assistant, associate, and full professor for all U.S. medical school graduates from 1979 through 1993 and for all members of U.S. medical school faculties from 1979 through 1997 were studied. Cohorts were defined on the basis of the year of graduation from medical school, track (tenure or nontenure), and academic department. Within each cohort, the number of women who advanced to a senior rank was compared with the number that would be expected on the basis of parity between men and women, and 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Women were significantly more likely than men to pursue an academic career. During the study period, 634 more women became faculty members than expected. The numbers were higher in the older cohorts than in the younger cohorts. The numbers of women who advanced to the ranks of associate and full professor were significantly lower than the expected numbers. This was true for both tenure and nontenure tracks, even after adjustment for the department. A total of 334 fewer women advanced to associate professor than expected, and 44 fewer women advanced to full professor than expected. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities persist in the advancement of men and women on medical school faculties. However, the numbers of women physicians at all levels of academic medicine are increasing.
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
Cited by
The “Gender Gap” in Authorship of Academic Medical Literature — A 35-Year Perspective
Jagsi, R., Guancial, E. A., Worobey, C. C., Henault, L. E., Chang, Y., Starr, R., Tarbell, N. J., & Hylek, E. M. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa053910 · Cited by 870
Sex Differences in Physician Salary in US Public Medical Schools
Jena, A. B., Olenski, A. R., & Blumenthal, D. M. (2016) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3284 · Cited by 641
Is There Still a Glass Ceiling for Women in Academic Surgery?
Zhuge, Y., Kaufman, J., Simeone, D. M., Chen, H., & Velazquez, O. C. (2011) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3182111120 · Cited by 513
Gender Differences in the Salaries of Physician Researchers
Jagsi, R., Griffith, K. A., Stewart, A., Sambuco, D., DeCastro, R., & Ubel, P. A. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.6183 · Cited by 426
The Gender Gap in NIH Grant Applications
Ley, T. J., & Hamilton, B. H. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1165878 · Cited by 271
Metadata
- Authors
- Nonnemaker, L.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2000-02-10
- Volume
- 342
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 399-405
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2324940296
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 47.58
- 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: Women Physicians in Academic Medicine — New Insights from Cohort Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm200002103420606
- The paper
- Nonnemaker, L. (2000). Women Physicians in Academic Medicine — New Insights from Cohort Studies. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200002103420606
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.