A national survey of career development according to gender and subspecialties among cardiologists in Japan.
<h4>Background</h4>Training opportunities, work satisfaction, and the factors that influence them according to gender and subspecialties are understudied among Japanese cardiologists.<h4>Methods</h4>We investigated the career development of Japanese cardiologists with an e-ma...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317029 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | <h4>Background</h4>Training opportunities, work satisfaction, and the factors that influence them according to gender and subspecialties are understudied among Japanese cardiologists.<h4>Methods</h4>We investigated the career development of Japanese cardiologists with an e-mail questionnaire. Feelings of inequality in training opportunities, work dissatisfaction, and reasons were assessed by examining the cardiologists' gender and invasiveness of subspecialties.<h4>Results</h4>Responses were received from 2,566 cardiologists. Female cardiologists were underrepresented in invasive subspecialties compared to males (14.2% vs. 85.8%, p<0.0001). In both invasive and non-invasive subspecialties, female cardiologists felt more inequality in training opportunities than males (invasive: 50.0% vs. 36.2%, non-invasive: 41.6% vs. 30.9%, p<0.001, respectively) and were less satisfied with their work (invasive: 26.0% vs. 18.3%, non-invasive: 24.7% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.001, respectively). Although female cardiologists in invasive subspecialties did not feel significantly more inequal and dissatisfied than those in non-invasive subspecialties (p = 0.063 and p = 0.758, respectively), male cardiologists in invasive subspecialties felt more inequal and dissatisfied than those in non-invasive subspecialties (p = 0.015 and p = 0.040, respectively). Female cardiologists were more influenced by gender bias and family issues for inequality in training opportunities (p = 0.0001, respectively), whereas male cardiologists were likely to be affected by specifications of belonging hospitals. Both genders felt dissatisfied when their expectations were unmet and they were overworked.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Female cardiologists felt more inequality regarding training opportunities and dissatisfaction with career development than male cardiologists in both the invasive and non-invasive subspecialties. Diversity support is warranted for achieving satisfying career course regardless of gender and subspecialty. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1932-6203 |