SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sabuncuoglu Serefeddin Health Sciences / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

WOMEN IN MEDICINE: STRUCTURAL GENDER INEQUALITIES AND THE GLASS CEILING

KADIN HEKİMLER: YAPISAL TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET EŞİTSİZLİKLERİ VE CAM TAVAN

Gamze Gürcan(TOBB EKONOMİ VE TEKNOLOJİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9896-8869
Berfin Nuray Cihangir(TOBB UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND TECHNOLOGY)0009-0007-8433-2764
Pages
110–120
Publication Date
2026-08-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings indicate that medicine continues to function within gendered organizational structures in which leadership and productivity are frequently defined through masculine norms.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Women’s participation in medicine has increased substantially worldwide; however, this growth has not resulted in proportional representation in leadership, academic advancement, or economic equity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Literature published between 2000 and 2025 was identified through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and reports from the AAMC, WHO, OECD, Eurostat, and TÜİK.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings indicate that medicine continues to function within gendered organizational structures in which leadership and productivity are frequently defined through masculine norms.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:cam tavan · cinsiyet eşitsizliği · sağlık iş gücü

Abstract

Women’s participation in medicine has increased substantially worldwide; however, this growth has not resulted in proportional representation in leadership, academic advancement, or economic equity. This narrative review examines the historical exclusion of women from institutional medicine and the persistence of structural gender inequalities in the profession. Literature published between 2000 and 2025 was identified through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and reports from the AAMC, WHO, OECD, Eurostat, and TÜİK. A thematic synthesis was conducted focusing on leadership disparities, specialty segregation, work–life conflict, mentorship inequalities, wage gaps, and workplace harassment. Findings indicate that medicine continues to function within gendered organizational structures in which leadership and productivity are frequently defined through masculine norms. Women physicians experience persistent barriers including the “glass ceiling,” limited access to mentorship and sponsorship, discrimination in specialty selection, and the unequal burden of unpaid caregiving responsibilities. Economic disparities extend beyond salary inequities to include motherhood penalties, reduced academic visibility, and disproportionate participation in unpaid institutional labor. Women also remain more vulnerable to workplace harassment, mobbing, burnout, and attrition from academic careers. The review demonstrates that gender inequality in medicine is structurally embedded within institutional cultures and professional hierarchies rather than resulting solely from individual prejudice. Addressing these inequities requires transparent promotion systems, gender-sensitive institutional policies, mentorship and leadership programs, flexible work arrangements, and sustained organizational reform to ensure equitable and sustainable healthcare systems.

Özet

Kadınların tıp alanındaki temsili dünya genelinde önemli ölçüde artmış olsa da bu sayısal büyüme, liderlik, akademik yükselme ve ekonomik eşitlik alanlarında orantılı temsil ile sonuçlanmamıştır. Bu derleme, kadınların kurumsal tıptan tarihsel dışlanmasını ve meslek içerisindeki yapısal toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliklerinin sürekliliğini incelemektedir. 2000–2025 yılları arasında yayımlanan çalışmalar; PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science ve Google Scholar veri tabanları ile Amerikan Tıp Kolejleri Birliği (AAMC), Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (WHO), Ekonomik İşbirliği ve Kalkınma Örgütü (OECD), Eurostat ve Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK) raporları aracılığıyla belirlenmiştir. Liderlik eşitsizlikleri, uzmanlık alanı ayrışması, iş-yaşam çatışması, mentorluk eşitsizlikleri, ücret farklılıkları ve işyerinde zorlayıcı deneyimler temaları doğrultusunda tematik sentez uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, tıbbın hâlen liderlik ve üretkenlik tanımlarının çoğunlukla maskülen normlar üzerinden şekillendiği toplumsal cinsiyet temelli örgütsel yapılar içerisinde işlediğini göstermektedir. Kadın hekimler; “cam tavan”, mentorluk ve sponsorluk mekanizmalarına sınırlı erişim, uzmanlık alanı seçiminde ayrımcılık ve ücretsiz bakım sorumluluklarının eşitsiz yükü gibi engellerle karşılaşmaktadır. Ekonomik eşitsizlikler yalnızca maaş farklılıklarıyla sınırlı olmayıp annelik cezası, azalmış akademik görünürlük ve ücretsiz kurumsal iş yüküne orantısız katılımı da kapsamaktadır. Kadınlar ayrıca işyeri tacizi, mobbing, tükenmişlik ve akademik kariyerden ayrılma açısından daha yüksek risk altındadır. Bu derleme, tıpta toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliğinin bireysel önyargıların ötesinde, kurumsal kültürler ve mesleki hiyerarşiler içerisine yerleşmiş yapısal mekanizmalardan kaynaklandığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu eşitsizliklerin giderilebilmesi için şeffaf yükseltme sistemleri, toplumsal cinsiyete duyarlı kurumsal politikalar, mentorluk ve liderlik programları, esnek çalışma düzenlemeleri ve sürdürülebilir kurumsal dönüşüm gereklidir. Daha adil çalışma ortamlarının oluşturulması, sağlık sistemlerinin uzun vadeli sürdürülebilirliği, kapsayıcılığı ve etkinliği açısından da kritik öneme sahiptir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gürcan, G., Cihangir, B. N. (2026). WOMEN IN MEDICINE: STRUCTURAL GENDER INEQUALITIES AND THE GLASS CEILING. Sabuncuoglu Serefeddin Health Sciences, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 110–120. https://doi.org/10.55895/sshs.1922427

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (39)

  1. Abid, A. M. (2014, October 22). Female doctors becoming 'trophy' wives: Is quota the right move? Dawn. (cited: 2026, April 6) Retrieved from: https://www.dawn.com/news/1139639
  2. Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139-158. https://10.1177/089124390004002002
  3. Association of American Medical Colleges. (2024). The state of women in academic medicine: 2023–2024. AAMC. (cited: 2026, April 6) Retrieved from: https://www.aamc.org/data-reports
  4. Bedoya-Vaca, R., Derose, K. P., & Romero-Sandoval, N. (2016). Gender and physician specialization and practice settings in Ecuador: A qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research, 16(1), 662. https://10.1186/s12913-016-1917-1
  5. Bleakley, A. (2013). Gender matters in medical education. Medical Education, 47(1), 59–70. https://10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012. 04351.x
  6. Carnes, M., Devine, P. G., Baier Manwell, L., Byars-Winston, A., Fine, E., Ford, C. E., et al. (2015). The effect of an intervention to break the gender bias habit for faculty at one institution: A cluster randomized, controlled trial. Academic Medicine, 90(2), 221–230. https://10.1097/ACM.0000000000000552
  7. Carnes, M., Devine, P. G., Isaac, C., Manwell, L. B., Ford, C. E., Byars-Winston, A., Fine, E., & Sheridan, J. (2012). Promoting institutional change through bias literacy. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 5(2), 63–77. https://10.1037/a0028128
  8. Carnes, M., Morrissey, C., & Geller, S. E. (2008). Women's health and women's leadership in academic medicine: hitting the same glass ceiling?. Journal of women's health (2002), 17(9), 1453–1462. https://10.1089/jwh.2007.0688
  9. Eroğlu, F. S., Koyuncu, S. B., Erkan, B., & Kıyak, Y. S. (2025). Cross-sectional study of women’s representation in leadership positions in Turkish medical schools, academic departments, specialty boards, conferences and journals. BMJ Open, 15(10), e089298. https://10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089298
  10. Eurostat. (n.d.). Healthcare personnel statistics – physicians. Eurostat Statistics Explained. (cited: 2026, April 6) Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Healthcare_personnel_statistics_-_physicians
  11. Gottlieb, A. S. (Ed.). (2021). Closing the gender pay gap in medicine: A roadmap for healthcare organizations and the women physicians who work for them. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Gottlieb, A. S., & Jagsi, R. (2021). Closing the gender pay gap in medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 385(27), 2501–2504. https://10.1056/NEJMp2114955
  12. Gottlieb, A. S., Dandar, V. M., Lautenberger, D. M., Best, C., & Jagsi, R. (2023). Equal pay for equal work in the dean suite: Addressing occupational gender segregation and compensation inequities among medical school leadership. Academic Medicine, 98(3), 296–299. https://10.1097/ACM.0000000000005087 Guarino, C. M., & Borden, V. M. H. (2017). Faculty service loads and gender: Are women taking care of the academic family? Research in Higher Education, 58(6), 672–694. https://10.1007/s11162-017-9454-2
  13. Heilman, M. E., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Gender stereotypes are alive, well, and busy producing workplace discrimination. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(4), 393–398. https://10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00072.x
  14. Hochschild, A.R., & Machung, A. (2012). The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home (Rev. ed.). New York: Penguin Books.
  15. Iyer, M. S., Bradford, C., Gottlieb, A. S., Kling, D. B., Jagsi, R., Mangurian, C., Marks, L., Meltzer, C. C., Overholser, B., Silver, J. K., Way, D. P., & Spector, N. D. (2024). Gender differences in the path to medical school deanship. JAMA Network Open, 7(7), e2420570. https://10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.20570 Jagsi, R., Griffith, K. A., Stewart, A., Sambuco, D., DeCastro, R., & Ubel, P. A. (2012). Gender differences in the salaries of physician researchers. JAMA, 307(22), 2410–2417. https://10.1001/jama.2012.6183 Jefferson, L., Bloor, K., & Maynard, A. (2015). Women in medicine: historical perspectives and recent trends. British Medical Bulletin, 114(1), 5–15. https://10.1093/bmb/ldv007
  16. Khan, S. (2023). The impact of gendered experiences on female medical students’ specialty choice: A systematic review. American Journal of Surgery, 225(1), 33–39. https://10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.10.023
  17. Kozma, L., & Khayat, N. (2022). Gendered Struggles over the Medical Profession in the Modern Middle East and North Africa. Journal of Middle East Women's Studies, 18(1), 1-11. https://10.1215/15525864-9494108
  18. Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Bibliometrics: global gender disparities in science. Nature, 504(7479), 211–213. https://10.1038/504211a
  19. Levy, M. S., Hunt, K. N., Lindsay, K. A., Mohan, V., Mercadel, A., Malecki, E., Desai, R., Sorondo, B. M., Pillai, A., & Huang, M. (2025). Gender inequity in institutional leadership roles in US academic medical centers: A systematic scoping review. JAMA Network Open, 8(4), e252829. https://10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.2829
  20. Linos, E., Lasky-Fink, J., Halley, M., Sarkar, U., Mangurian, C., Sabry, H., et al. (2022). Impact of sexual harassment and social support on burnout in physician mothers. Journal of Women’s Health, 31(7), 932–940. https://10.1089/jwh.2021.0487
  21. Mwakyanjala, E. J., Cowart, J. B., Hayes, S. N., Blair, J. E., & Maniaci, M. J. (2019). Pregnancy and parenting during cardiology fellowship. Journal of the American Heart Association, 8(14), e012137. https://10.1161/JAHA.119.012137
  22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025). Health at a glance 2025: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/11/health-at-a-glance-2025_a894f72e/8f9e3f98-en.pdf
  23. Perera, S., Aslam, A., Burgess, S., Castles, A.V., Segan, L., Mukherjee, S., Beale, A.L., Gutman, S.J., Biswas, S., Leet, A., & Zaman, S. (2023). Gender differences in medical student perceptions of a career in cardiology. Heart, Lung and Circulation, 32(10), 1250-1256. https://10.1016/j.hlc.2023.05.017
  24. Phillips, J. P. (2016). Workplace violence against health care workers in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(7), e14. https://10.1056/NEJMc1606816
  25. Reza, N., Krishnan, S., & Adusumalli, S. (2020). A model for the career advancement of women fellows and cardiologists. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 76(8), 996–1000. https://10.1016/j.jacc.2020.07.011
  26. Ridgeway, C.L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York: Oxford University Press.
  27. Rotenstein, L. S., & Jena, A. B. (2018). Lost Taussigs - The consequences of gender discrimination in medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 378(24), 2255–2257. https://10.1056/NEJMp1801164
  28. Sarı, N. (2004). Mekteb-i Tıbbiye. Retrieved from: https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/mekteb-i-tibbiye Shahzad, M., Jamil, B., Bushra, M., Mahboob, U., & Elmiqdadi, F. (2024). Gender-based differences in the representation and experiences of academic leaders in medicine and dentistry: A mixed-method study from Pakistan. BMC Medical Education, 24, 885. https://10.1186/s12909-024-05811-6 Shen, M. R., Tzioumis, E., Andersen, E., Wouk, K., McCall, R., Li, W., Girdler, S., & Malloy, E. (2022). Impact of mentoring on academic career success for women in medicine: A systematic review. Academic Medicine, 97(3), 444–458. https://10.1097/ACM.0000000000004563
  29. Silver, J. K. (2023). Six practical strategies to mentor and sponsor women in academic medicine. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e47799. https://10.2196/47799
  30. Snyder, A., Xiang, D., Smith, A., Esswein, S., Toubat, O., Di Capua, J., et al. (2021). Gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research: A secondary cross-sectional cohort analysis. BMC Medical Education, 21(1), 591. https://10.1186/s12909-021-03004-z
  31. Steiner-Hofbauer, V., Katz, H. W., Grundnig, J. S., & Holzinger, A. (2023). Female participation or “feminization” of medicine. Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 173(5–6), 125–130. https://10.1007/s10354-022-00961-y
  32. Toprak, Z. (2014, Eylül). Dârülfünuna kız öğrencilerin kabulü (1919) ve gelenekçilerle yenilikçiler. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/11625393/D%C3%BCr%C3%BClf%C3%BCnuna_K%C4%B1z_%C3%96%C4%9Frencilerin_Kab%C3%BCl%C3%BC_1919_ve_Gelenek%C3%A7ilerle_Yenilik%C3%A7iler
  33. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK) & UN Women. (2024). Türkiye'de istatistiklerle kadın, 2024. (cited: 2024) Retrieved from: https://tuik.gov.tr/media/announcements/istatistiklerle_kadin2024.pdf
  34. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, (2024). Occupational Outlook Handbook, Physicians and Surgeons. Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/physicians-and-surgeons.htm
  35. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Labor force statistics from the current population survey. Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/cps/
  36. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Women in the labor force: A databook. U.S. Department of Labor. (cited: 2026, April 6) Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook.htm
  37. White, F. S., McDade, S., Yamagata, H., & Morahan, P. S. (2012). Gender-related differences in the pathway to and characteristics of U.S. medical school deanships. Academic Medicine, 87(8), 1015–1023. https://10.1097/ACM.0b013e31825d3495
  38. World Health Organization & UN Women. (2022). Gender equity in the health and care workforce: Policy brief for consultation (draft). World Health Organization. Retrieved from: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/health-workforce/ghwn-geh-policy-brief-for-consultation.pdf World Health Organization. (2019). Delivered by women, led by men: A gender and equity analysis of the global health and social workforce. Retrieved from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241515467 Yıldırım, N. (2011). Türkiye'nin ilk kadın doktoru Safiye Ali. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.
  39. Zuskin, E., Pucarin-Cvetkovic, J., Schachter, E. N., Mustajbegovic, J., Vitale, K., Deckovic-Vukres, V., Milosevic, M., & Jelinic, J. D. (2008). Women in medicine through the ages. La Medicina del lavoro, 99(6), 407–414.