There has been extensive interest in promoting gender equality within radiology, a predominately male field. In this study, our aim was to quantify gender representation in neuroradiology faculty rankings and determine any related factors that may contribute to any such disparity. We evaluated the academic and administrative faculty members of neuroradiology divisions for all on-line listed programs in the US and Canada. After excluding programs that did not fulfill our selection criteria, we generated a short list of 85 US and 8 Canadian programs. We found 465 faculty members who met the inclusion criteria for our study. We used Elsevier's SCOPUS for gathering the data pertaining to the publications, H-index, citations, and tenure of the productivity of each faculty member. Gender disparity was insignificant when analyzing academic ranks. There are more men working in neuroimaging relative to women (χ2 = 0.46; P = .79). However, gender disparity was highly significant for leadership positions in neuroradiology (χ2 = 6.76; P = .009). The median H-index was higher among male faculty members (17.5) versus female faculty members (9). Female faculty members have odds of 0.84 compared with male faculty members of having a higher H-index, adjusting for publications, citations, academic ranks, leadership ranks, and interaction between gender and publications and gender and citations (9). Neuroradiology faculty members follow the same male predominance seen in many other specialties of medicine. In this study, issues such as mentoring, role models, opportunities to engage in leadership/research activities, funding opportunities, and mindfulness regarding research productivity are explored.

Emergency and trauma radiologists, emergency department’s physicians and nurses, researchers, departmental leaders, and health policymakers have attempted to discover efficient approaches to enhance the provision of quality patient care. There are increasing expectations for radiology practices to deliver a dedicated emergency radiology service providing 24/7/365 on-site attending radiologist coverage. Emergency radiologists (ERs) are pressed to meet the demand of increased imaging volume, provide accurate reports, maintain a lower proportion of discrepancy rate, and with a rapid report turnaround time of finalized reports. Thus, rendering the radiologists overburdened. The demand for an increased efficiency in providing quality care to acute patients has led to the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field. AI can be used to assist emergency and trauma radiologists deal with the ever-increasing imaging volume and workload, as AI methods have typically demonstrated a variety of applications in medical image analysis and interpretation, albeit most programs are in a training or validation phase. This article aims to offer an evidence-based discourse about the evolving role of artificial intelligence in assisting the imaging pathway in an emergency and trauma radiology department. We hope to generate a multidisciplinary discourse that addresses the technical processes, the challenges in the labour-intensive process of training, validation and testing of an algorithm, the need for emphasis on ethics, and how an emergency radiologist’s role is pivotal in the execution of AI-guided systems within the context of an emergency and trauma radiology department. This exploratory narrative serves the present-day health leadership’s information needs by proposing an AI supported and radiologist centered framework depicting the work flow within a department. It is suspected that the use of such a framework, if efficacious, could provide considerable benefits for patient safety and quality of care provided. Additionally, alleviating radiologist burnout and decreasing healthcare costs over time.

Gender disparity remains prevalent in the field of academic surgery with an under-representation of women at senior leadership ranks. A wide variety of causes are reported to contribute to this gender-based discrimination but a current quantitative analysis in the US has significant importance. This cross-sectional study aims to document gender disparity in academic and leadership positions in surgery as well as its relationship with scholarly productivity. The American Medical Association's Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA), was used to identify General Surgery programs. Each institution's website was used to identify its faculty's primary profiles for data collection. Individuals with an MD or DO, and an academic ranking of Professor, Associate Professor or Assistant Professor were included. Academic productivity was quantified by recording H-index, number of publications, number of citations, and years of active research of a physician. All statistical analysis was performed on SPSS Statistics version 20.0. A total of 144 academic programs were including in our analysis constituting 4085 surgeons, only one-fifth (n = 873, 21%) of which were women. Furthermore, only 19% of all leadership positions were assumed by female surgeons. Leadership positions and academic rank correlated significantly with increasing research productivity. The difference in H-index between genders was statistically significant (P < 0.05) with men possessing a higher median for H-index [13] than women [9]. Transplantation Surgery [17] had the highest median H-indices for female surgeons. Male surgeons (n = 18) were twice as likely to be Departmental Chairs as their female counterparts (n = 9). However, female surgical oncologists held the highest proportion of leadership positions (31%). A significant gender-based disparity was found in leadership positions and academic ranks. Research productivity appeared to be integral for academic and leadership appointments. Institution-level measures that enhance support, mentorship, and sponsorship for women are imperative to achieve overall parity in general surgery.

In the 1960s, less than 10% of medical school graduates were women. Today, almost half of all medical school graduates are women. Despite the significant rise in female medical school graduates, there continues to be a large gender gap in most subspecialties, particularly surgical subspecialties such as neurosurgery. The purpose of our study was to assess the factors contributing to differences in the academic ranks of male and female staff in academic neurosurgery programs in Canada and the United States (US). Data about women in academic neurosurgery was collected from a number of sources, including Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA), Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS) FRIEDA, ACGME, CaRMS, Pubmed, and Scopus, to create a database of all neurosurgeons in the US and Canada. The analysis included neurosurgeons in academic and leadership ranks and also the H index, citations, publications, citations per year, and publications per year. Women represent only 12% of neurosurgeons in the US and Canada. When gender is further analyzed by academic appointment, women represent just over 12% of neurosurgeons at the assistant and associate professor levels (15.44% and 13.27%, respectively) but significantly less at the full professor level (5.84%). Likewise, only 7.45% of women hold first-in command leadership positions while 4.69% hold second-in-command positions within their institutions. The existing data shows that women are significantly under-represented in academic neurosurgery. Lack of role models, experience, limited scientific output, and aspirations of a controlled lifestyle could be the potential contributing factors.