Applying Representation Quotient Methodology to Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Trends of Applicants and Matriculants to Urology Residency Programs From 2010-2018

• Published in: Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) Vol. 172; pp. 25 - 32
• Main Authors: Persad-Paisley, Elijah M., Kazal, Frances H., Shamshad, Alizeh, Zeyl, Victoria G., Douglas, Cody M., Wasserman, Meredith C., Thavaseelan, Simone
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.02.2023
• Subjects: Ethnicity; Female; Gender Identity; Humans; Internship and Residency; Male; Minority Groups; United States; Urology - education; United States
• ISSN: 0090-4295; 1527-9995
• DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.09.032

To accurately examine the trends in the racial and gender composition of medical students applying and matriculating to urology residency programs. Reports on race/ethnicity and gender for medical school graduates, and urology residency applicants and matriculants were obtained for years 2010-2018. The proportions of individuals representing different racial and gender identities among urology applicants and matriculants were divided by a denominator of their proportion in medical school graduating classes to produce representation quotients (RQapp and RQmat, respectively). Linear regression models were performed on yearly RQs to estimate the RQ changes over time. Nonparametric testing was used to evaluate for differences in applicant to matriculant representation within each identity. ANOVA was performed separately on RQapp and RQmat values to assess differences in representation between identities in the applicant and matriculant populations. Asian men experienced increases in representation among urology applicants (RQapp: slope 2.04 × 10−2; P = .03) and matriculants (RQmat slope: 7.46 × 10−2; P = .0076) during the study period. Black men trended towards under-representation among applicants (RQapp slope –1.51 × 10−1; P = .03) and matriculants (RQmat slope: –1.71 × 10−1; P = .02). When examining genders, both men (RQapp=1.43 vs RQmat=1.44; P = .80) and women (RQapp=0.52 vs RQmat = 0.51; P = .67) had unchanged representation in the applicant and matriculant cohorts, but women severely underrepresented on average. Women and Black men are underrepresented in the urology workforce. These concerning findings demonstrate the dire need for initiatives regarding recruitment into urology to support and to ensure successful entry into the field for minority groups.