Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Equity in Gynecologic Surgery: Lessons from History, Strengthening the Future

  • Diversity in the Surgical Profession (S Pitt, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Surgery Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Although women have made up the majority of the obstetrics and gynecology (ObGyn) for nearly a decade, inequities related to gender persist. The scope of these inequities includes disparities related to education and training, compensation, pregnancy and parenting, advancement and leadership, and the workplace environment.

Recent Findings

Although gynecology began as an early, innovative surgical field, over time the evolution of the field has followed a path distinct from that of other surgical fields. Gynecology was a unique surgical specialty that included longitudinal care but through multiple permutations has transformed into a combined specialty with obstetrics and primary care. This merger overlapped with the feminization of the specialty as well as improved non-surgical treatment for gynecologic pathology. The constellation of these factors, in conjunction with the historical separation of gynecology from other surgical fields, has resulted in de-prioritization of surgery within the specialty. Efforts to encourage high-volume gynecologic surgeons are needed to address quality gaps.

Summary

Subspecialty surgical training has been an increasingly popular option for ObGyn trainees and is among the proposed solutions to ensuring that patients in need of surgery on the female reproductive tract receive high quality care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •Of importance ••Of major importance

  1. Aziz HA, DuCoin C, Welsh DJ, Paramo JC, Andreone P, Butsch DW, Smith JA, Pories SE, Baxter NN. 2018 ACS Governors Survey: gender inequality and harassment remain a challenge in surgery. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2019;104:21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carnes M, Bartels CM, Kaatz A, et al. Why is John more likely to become department chair than Jennifer? Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2015;126:197–214.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Boyle P. Nation’s physician workforce evolves: more women, a bit older, and toward different specialties. AAMC 2.2.21. Searched 8.8.21. https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/nation-s-physician-workforce-evolves-more-women-bit-older-and-toward-different-specialties. Accessed 8 August 2021.

  4. Hall EF, Raker CA, Hampton BS. Variability in gynecologic case volume of obstetrician-gynecologist residents graduating from 2009 to 2017. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(6):617.e1-8.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Smith BQ, Woelfel I, Salani R, Harzman A, Chen X. Resident self-entrustment and expectations of autonomy: OB>GYN? J Surg Educ. 2021;78(1):275–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gressel GM, George K, Woodland MB, Banks E. Residents’ confidence in performing robotic hysterectomy in obstetrics and gynecologic training programs. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;S1553–4650(21):00197–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2021.04.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chang JC, Odrobina MR, McIntyre-Seltman K. The effect of student gender on the obstetrics and gynecology clerkship experience. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19:87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Flyckt RL, White EE, Goodman LR, Mohr C, Dutta S, Zanotti KM. The use of laparoscopy simulation to explore gender differences in resident surgical confidence. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2017;1945801:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Vogt VY, Givens VM, Keathley CA, Lipscomb GH, Summitt RL. Is a resident’s score on a videotaped objective structured assessment of technical skills affected by revealing the resident’s identity? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:688–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Frishman GN, Bell CL, Botros S, Brost BC, Robinson RD, Steinauer J, Wright JD, Adams KE. Applying to subspecialty fellowship: clarifying the confusion and conflicts. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(2):243–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.10.936.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. ••Heisler CA, Mark K, Ton J, Miller P, Temkin SM. Has a critical mass of women resulted in gender equity in gynecologic surgery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(5):665–73. This publication was the first to summarize the evidence-based breadth of gender inequities within obstetrics and gynecology, a majority-women surgical specialty. Highlighting that a critical mass of women within surgery does not inform gender equity, recommendations for deliberate and actionable changes by critical actors was promoted.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Warner AS, Lehmann LS. Gender wage disparities in medicine: time to close the gap. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(7):1334–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Gilbert SB, Allshouse A, Skanzik-Wikiel ME. Gender inequality in salaries among reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2019;111:1194–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Benoit MF, Ma JF, Upperman BA. Comparison of 2015 Medicare relative value units for gender-specific procedures: gynecologic and gynecologic–oncologic versus urologic CPT coding. Has time healed gender-worth? Gynecol Oncol. 2017;144(2):336–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. •Watson KL, King LP. Double discrimination, the pay gap in gynecologic surgery, and its association with quality of care. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(4):657–61. The financial implications of gender inequity for women surgeons caring for women patients are significant.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. •Pelley E, Carnes M. When a specialty becomes “women’s work”: trends in and implications of specialty gender segregation in medicine. Acad Med. 2020;95(10):1499–506. Salaries of various medical and surgical specialties were evaluated, identifying how femininization of each has consistently resulted in lower pay.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Greenberg CC. Association for Academic Surgery presidential address: sticky floors and glass ceilings. J Surg Res. 2017;219:ix–xviii.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hegewisch A, Hartmann H. Occupational segregation and the gender wage gap: A job half done. https://iwpr.org/iwpr-issues/employment-and-earnings/occupational-segregation-and-the-gender-wage-gap-a-job-half-done/. Accessed 12 August 2021

  19. Pan J. Gender segregation in occupations: the role of tipping and social interactions. J Labor Econ. 2015;2015:365–408.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kane L. Medscape physician compensation report 2021: the recovery begins. https://www.medscape.com/slideshow/2021-compensation-overview-6013761#3. Accessed 16 May 2021

  21. Smith V, Bethune C, Hurley KF. Examining medical student specialty choice through a gender lens: an orientational qualitative study. Teach Learn Med. 2018;30(1):33–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/policy-and-position-statements/statements-of-policy/2020/paid-parental-leave. Accessed 8 August 2021.

  23. Lumpkin ST, Klein ML, Battarbee AN, Strassle PD, Scarlet S, Duke MC. Fellowship or family? A comparison of residency leave policies with the Family and Medical Leave Act. J Surg Res. 2019;241:302–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang SS, Ackerman S. The Motherhood penalty: is it alive and well in 2020? J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17(5):688–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hill EK, Stuckey A, Flascone S, Raker C, Clark MA, Brown A, Gordinier M, Robison K. Gender and new balance of parenting and professional life among gynecology subspecialists. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;18:31341–4.

    Google Scholar 

  26. ••Richter KP, Clark L, Wick JA, Cruvinel E, Durham D, Shaw P, Shih GR, Befort CA, Simari RD. Women physicians and promotion in academic medicine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(22):2148–57. The rates of academic promotion for women faculty are significantly lower than for men faculty, worse at higher ranks and did not improve over time.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wooding DJ, Das P, Tiwana S, Siddiqi J, Khosa F. Race, ethnicity and gender in academic obstetrics and gynecology: 12-year trends. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020;2(4):100178.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hofler LG, Hacker MR, Dodge LE, Schutzberg R, Ricciotti HA. Comparison of women in department leadership in obstetrics and gynecology with other specialties. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127(3):442–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Temkin SM, Rubinsak L, Benoit MF, Hong L, Chandavarkar U, Heisler CA, Berry LK, Rimel BJ, McGuire WP. Take me to your leader: reporting structures and equity in academic gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157:759–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pololi LH, Civian JT, Brennan RT, Dottolo AL, Krupat E. Experiencing the culture of academic medicine: gender matters, a national study. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(2):201–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hansen M, Schoonover A, Skarica B, Harrod T, Bahr N, Guise J-M. Implicit gender bias among US resident physicians. BMC Med Ed. 2019;19(1):396.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Filut A, Alvarez M, Carnes M. Discrimination toward physicians of color: a systematic review. J Natl Med Assoc. 2020;112(2):117–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Stephens EH, Heisler CA, Temkin SM, Miller P. The current status of women in surgery: how to affect the future. JAMA Surg. 2020;155(9):876–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ellington DR, Bevis K, Boitano T. Tomorrow’s women’s healthcare leaders: a needs assessment for the development of an ObGyn resident and fellow leadership curriculum. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134:53S-54S.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Laver KE, Prichard IJ, Cations M, Osenk I, Govin K, Coveney JD. A systematic review of interventions to support the careers of women in academic medicine and other disciplines. BMJ Open. 2018;8(3):e020380.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Shakil S, Redberg RF. Gender disparities in sponsorship—how they perpetuate the glass ceiling. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(4):582. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9411.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Burgess A, van Diggele C, Mellis C. Mentorship in the health professions: a review. Clin Teach. 2018;15(3):197–202.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sambunjak D, Straus SE, Marušić A. Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296(9):1103–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Nasab S, Rushing JS, Segars JH, Evers E, Handa VL, Lawson S, Miller C, Yenokyan G, Bienstock J, Satin AJ. A mentorship program for academic obstetrician gynecolologists that improved publication and overall confidence for success. Semin Reprod Med. 2019;37(05/06):257–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Esters D, Xierali IM, Nivet MA, Rayburn WF. The rise of nontendured faculty in obstetrics and gynecology by sex and underrepresented in medicine status. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134(Suppl 1):34S-39S. https://doi.org/10.10197/AOG.00000000000003484.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Jagsi R, Guancial EA, Worobey CC, Henault LE, Chang Y, Starr R, Tarbell NJ, Hylek EM. The “gender gap” in authorship of academic medical literature—a 35-year perspective. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(3):281–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lewiss RE, Silver JK, Bernstein CA, Mills AM, Overholser B, Spector ND. Is academic medicine making mid-career women physicians invisible? J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2020;29(2):187–92.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Murrar S, Johnson PA, Lee Y-G, Carnes M. Research conducted in women was deemed more impactful but less publishable than the same research conducted in men. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2020.8666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Nguyen V, Marmor RA, Ramamoorthy SL, Blair SL, Clary BM, Sicklick JK. Academic Surgical Oncologists’ Productivity Correlates with Gender, Grant Funding, and Institutional NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center Affiliation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(7):1852–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. ••Dossett LA, Vitous CA, Lindquist K, et al. Women surgeons’ experiences of interprofessional workplace conflict. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3:e2019843–943. Women surgeons are confronted with increased harassment and discrimination from ancillary staff (nursing and OR teams). These interprofessional conflicts lead to degradation of communication and negatively impact patient care and teamwork.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Morgan HK, Purkis JA, Porter AC, Lypson ML, Santen SA, Christner JG, Grum CM, Hammoud MM. Student evaluation of faculty physicians: gender differences in teaching evaluations. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2016;25:453–6.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Berlingo L, Girault A, Azria E, Goffinet F, Le Ray C. Women and academic careers in obstetrics and gynaecology: aspirations and obstacles among postgraduate trainees—a mixed-methods study. BJOG. 2019;126(6):770–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. ••Brown J, Drury L, Raub K, Levy B, Brantner P, Krivak TC, Bradley L, Naumann RW. Workplace harassment and discrimination in gynecology: results of the AAGL Member Survey. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019;26(5):838–46. A survey of the AAGL membership, which included women and men gynecologic surgeons in US and non-US hospitals, identified experiences of harassment and discrimination, which occurred more often for women surgeons.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hong L, Rubinsak L, Benoit MF, Teoh DGK, Ioffe Y, Chandavarkar U, Brockmeyer A, Stevens EE, Temkin SM. Perpetrators of workplace bullying and gender discriminations experienced by women gynecologic oncologists. Am Soc Clin Oncol J. 2021;39(15):11013.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Vargas EA, Brassel ST, Cortina LM, Settles IH, Johnson TRB, Jagsi R. #MeToo: A large-scale examination of the incidence and impact of sexual harassment of physicians and other faculty at an academic medical center. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2020;29(1):13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Othersen HB Jr. Ephraim McDowell: the qualities of a good surgeon. Ann Surg. 2004;239(5):648–50.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Nakayama DK. Antisepsis and asepsis and how they shaped modern surgery. Am Surg. 2018;84(6):766–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Jones HW, Rock JA. Te Linde’s operative gynecology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Leavitt JW. Brought to bed: childbearing in America, 1750–1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Sandelowski M. ‘This most dangerous instrument’: propriety, power, and the vaginal speculum. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2000;29(1):73–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Dastur AE, Tank P. Howard Atwood Kelly: much beyond the stitch. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2010;60(5):392.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Allen PM, Setze TK. Howard Atwood Kelly (1858–1943): his life and his enduring legacy. South Med J. 1991;84(3):361.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Gray LA. Presidential address: Training in pelvic surgery. With a review of the Hopkins method and contemporary opinion. Ann Surg. 1982;195(5):525–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. King LP. A reluctant critic: why gynecologic surgery needs reform. Hastings Cent Rep. 2019;49(3):10–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Zetka JR Jr. The making of the “women’s physician” in American Obstetrics and Gynecology: re-forging an occupational identity and a division of labor. J Health Soc Behav. 2008;49(3):335–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Zetka JR Jr. Establishing specialty jurisdictions in medicine: the case of American obstetrics and gynaecology. Sociol Health Illn. 2011;33(6):837–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Averette HE. Society of gynecologic oncologists: reflections on the beginnings. Gynecol Oncol. 1994;55(1):6–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Lautenberger D, Dandar V. The State of Women in Academic Medicine 2018-2019: Exploring Pathways to Equity. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/data/2018-2019-state-women-academic-medicine-exploring-pathways-equity. 2020. Accessed August 8 2021

  64. AAMC. Table 13: U.S. Medical School Faculty by Sex, Rank, and Department, 2019. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/faculty-institutions/interactive-data/2019-us-medical-school-faculty. 2019. Accessed 17 September 2020.

  65. Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Lu Y-S, Neugut AI, Hershman A. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(201):233–41.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Cadish LA, Kropat G, Muffly TM. Hysterectomy volume among recent obstetrics and gynecology residency graduates. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2021;27(6):382–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Ruiz MP, Chen L, Hou JY, Tergas AI, St Clari CM, Ananth CV, Neugut AI, Hershman DL, Wright JD. Outcomes of hysterectomy performed by very low-volume surgeons. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(6):981–90.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Mowat A, Maher C, Ballard E. Surgical outcomes for low-volume vs high-volume surgeons in gynecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(1):21–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Adams-Piper ER, Guaderrama NM, Chen Q, Whitcomb EL. Impact of surgical training on the performance of proposed quality measures for hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(6):588.e1-588.e5.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Morgan DM, Pulliam S, Adam RA, Swenson C, Guire K, Kamdar N, Guaderrama N. Analysis of high-, intermediate-, and low-volume surgeons when performing hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse. Fem Pelvic Med Reconst Surg. 2016;22(1):43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Shepherd JP, Carter-Brooks CM, Kantartzis KL, et al. The impact of individual surgeon volume on hysterectomy costs. JSLS. 2017;21(1):e201600112.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Brennand EA, Quan H. Evaluation of the effect of surgeon’s operative volume and specialty on likelihood of revision after mesh midurethral sling placement. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:1099–108.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Matsuo K, Matsuzaki S, Mandelbaum RS, Matsushima K, Klar M, Grubbs BH, Roman LD, Wright JD. Hospital surgical volume and perioperative mortality of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies. J Surg Onc. 2020;121:402–9.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Sinno AK, Li X, Thompson RE, Tanner EJ 3rd, Levinson KL, Stone RL, Temkin SM, Fader AN, Chi DS, Roche KL. Trends and factors associated with radical cytoreductive surgery in the United States: a case for centralized care. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(3):493–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.03.020.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. •Knisely A, Huang Y, Melamed A, Gockley A, Tergas AI, St Clair CM, Hou JY, Khoury-Collado F, Accordino M, Hershman DL, Wright J. Disparities in *access to high-volume surgeons within high-volume hospitals for hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;138(2):208–17. Socioeconomic disparities prevent women who need gynecologic surgery from accessing high-volume surgeons within high-volume hospital. Low-volume surgeons, even in a high-volume hospital, are known to have higher morbidity and mortality, which adversely impacts women of lower socioeconomic status.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Delpech R, Bloy G, Panjo H, Falcoff H, Ringa V, Rigal L. Physicians’ preventive practices: more frequently performed for male patients and by female physicians. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Tsugawa Y, Jena AB, Figueroa JF, Orav J, Blumenthal DM, Jha AK. Comparison of hospital mortality and readmission rates for Medicare patients treated by male vs female physicians. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(2):206–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Greenwood BN, Carnahan S, Huang L. Patient-physician gender concordance and increased mortality among female heart attack patients. PNAS. 2018;115(34):8569–74.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Wallis CJD, Ravi B, Coburn N, Nam RK, Detsky AS, Satkunasivam R. Comparison of postoperative outcomes among patients treated by male and female surgeons: a population based matched cohort study. BMJ. 2017;359: j4366. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4366.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Walter A. Every woman deserves a high-volume surgeon. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(2):139.e1-3.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Burgess DJ, Joseph A, van Ryn M, Carnes M. Does stereotype threat affect women in academic medicine? Acad Med. 2012;87(4):506–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Pearre DC, Leaf M-C, Heisler CA, Chang J, Ziogas A, Temkin SM. Surgery as women’s work: gender in presentations at gynecologic conferences. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.06.063.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Siedhoff MT, Truong MD, Wright KN. Gynecologic surgery tracking in obstetrics and gynecology residency. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2020;32:298–303.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Glaser LM, Brennan L, King LP, Milad MP. Surgeon volume in benign gynecologic surgery: review of outcomes, impact on training, and ethical contexts. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019;26(2):279–87.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Departments of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Urology, University of Wisconsin, 202 S. Park Street, Madison, WI, 53715, USA

    Christine A. Heisler

  2. Washington, DC, 20003, USA

    Sarah M. Temkin

Authors
  1. Christine A. Heisler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah M. Temkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine A. Heisler.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interests with respect to authorship or publication of this manuscript.

Research Involving Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical collection on Diversity in the Surgical Profession.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heisler, C.A., Temkin, S.M. Gender Equity in Gynecologic Surgery: Lessons from History, Strengthening the Future. Curr Surg Rep 10, 8–17 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-022-00307-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-022-00307-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation