Gender influences on earnings of obstetrician-gynecologists

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that the observed difference in earnings between male and female obstetrician-gynecologists could be explained by variations in productivity and human capital. METHODS: Data from a 1991 national survey of ACOG Fellows were used to provide a descriptive analysis of male and female obstetrician-gynecologists' demographic characteristics, net income, experience, practice characteristics, workload, and practice activities. Variables found to have a significant impact on net income or to vary significantly by sex were included in a multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one percent of the 1286 survey respondents were female obstetrician-gynecologists. Women were almost twice as likely as men to be in salaried positions (P < .001) and more than twice as likely to have less than 10 years of experience (P < .001). Women reported fewer annual patient-contact hours (P < .05) and performed fewer than half as many hysterectomies (P < .001). Average annual earnings for women were 71% of men's annual net income (P < .001). The multivariate regression analysis found that male-female differences in the factors included in the analysis (ie, workload, experience, practice type) resulted in an 18.7% male-female income gap. The analysis also revealed an income gap of 14.2% that was not accounted for by differences in the objective factors included in the model. CONCLUSION: More than half of the overall male-female income gap was explained by differences in personal and practice characteristics. However, female obstetrician-gynecologists earned 14.2% less than men, after controlling for variations in productivity and human capital.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. W. Reyes Gender Gaps in Income and Productivity of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Obstet. Gynecol., May 1, 2007; 109(5): 1031 - 1039. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. FRANK, J. ROCK, and D. SARA Characteristics of Female Obstetrician-Gynecologists in the United States Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 1999; 94(5): 659 - 665. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]