Scholarlink

Background <p>In Germany, the development of evidence based medical guidelines is overseen by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). Ensuring balanced representation across medical specialties and genders is essential for generating comprehensive, equitable, and unbiased treatment recommendations. This study evaluates the involvement of radiation oncology (RO) specialists and assesses gender representation within the panels of German oncological guidelines.</p> Methods <p>We analysed all oncological guidelines in the AWMF registry (<i>n</i> = 93/820). Data were collected from AWMF’s registry, the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) website, and affiliated organizations including the Working Group for Radiation Oncology (ARO) and the Professional Association of German Radiation Oncologists (BVDST). Gender distribution, academic qualifications, and participation rates were analysed.</p> Results <p>Of 93&#xa0;oncological AWMF guidelines, RO panel members participated in 71&#xa0;(76.3%), with particularly high representation in S3 (highest standard of quality and reliability) guidelines (92.5%). A&#xa0;total of 2795 panelists were represented in 85&#xa0;analysable oncological guidelines, with 28.3% being female. Among the 255 RO panelists, the proportion of women is significantly higher with 34.5% (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), with varying distribution across organizations: DEGRO 38.6%, ARO 31.7%, and BVDST 28.2%. Academic qualifications regarding all panelists differed significantly by gender (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) with a&#xa0;high proportion of professors being male (81.3%), while women were disproportionately represented among those no academic title (62.6%).</p> Conclusions <p>RO demonstrates strong representation in German oncological guideline development, in contrast to international trends where the specialty is frequently underrepresented. Nonetheless, consistent with patterns observed across other medical disciplines and healthcare systems, gender disparities remain evident: women constitute roughly one-third of overall panel members. These findings establish an important reference point for tracking future progress toward achieving gender equity in the formulation of oncological guidelines.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Radiation Oncology Representation in German Evidence-Based Oncological Guidelines: 2025 Analysis of Participation and Parity from Women in Radiation Oncology Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO)

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月10日

查看全文
  • Angela Besserer,
  • Sally Mutiara,
  • Monika Nothacker,
  • Andrea Wittig,
  • Juliane Hörner-Rieber,
  • Lara Caglayan,
  • Daniel Habermehl,
  • Stefan Höcht,
  • Michael van Kampen,
  • Cordula Petersen,
  • Ursula Nestle,
  • Mechthild Krause,
  • Dirk Vordermark,
  • Maike Trommer

摘要

Background

In Germany, the development of evidence based medical guidelines is overseen by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). Ensuring balanced representation across medical specialties and genders is essential for generating comprehensive, equitable, and unbiased treatment recommendations. This study evaluates the involvement of radiation oncology (RO) specialists and assesses gender representation within the panels of German oncological guidelines.

Methods

We analysed all oncological guidelines in the AWMF registry (n = 93/820). Data were collected from AWMF’s registry, the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) website, and affiliated organizations including the Working Group for Radiation Oncology (ARO) and the Professional Association of German Radiation Oncologists (BVDST). Gender distribution, academic qualifications, and participation rates were analysed.

Results

Of 93 oncological AWMF guidelines, RO panel members participated in 71 (76.3%), with particularly high representation in S3 (highest standard of quality and reliability) guidelines (92.5%). A total of 2795 panelists were represented in 85 analysable oncological guidelines, with 28.3% being female. Among the 255 RO panelists, the proportion of women is significantly higher with 34.5% (p < 0.05), with varying distribution across organizations: DEGRO 38.6%, ARO 31.7%, and BVDST 28.2%. Academic qualifications regarding all panelists differed significantly by gender (p < 0.001) with a high proportion of professors being male (81.3%), while women were disproportionately represented among those no academic title (62.6%).

Conclusions

RO demonstrates strong representation in German oncological guideline development, in contrast to international trends where the specialty is frequently underrepresented. Nonetheless, consistent with patterns observed across other medical disciplines and healthcare systems, gender disparities remain evident: women constitute roughly one-third of overall panel members. These findings establish an important reference point for tracking future progress toward achieving gender equity in the formulation of oncological guidelines.