Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
More women than ever are entering MD-PhD programs. What lies ahead for them?
Lawrence F. Brass, Myles H. Akabas
Lawrence F. Brass, Myles H. Akabas
View: Text | PDF
Physician-Scientist Development Aging

More women than ever are entering MD-PhD programs. What lies ahead for them?

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

The earliest MD-PhD programs were small and enrolled mostly men. Here, we show that since 2014 there has been a steady increase in the number of women in MD-PhD programs, the number of women reaching parity with men in 2023. This change was due to an increase in female applicants, a decrease in male applicants, and an increase in the acceptance rate for women, which had previously been lower than that for men. Data from the National MD-PhD Program Outcomes Study show that training duration has been similar for men and women, as have most choices of medical specialties and workplaces. However, women were less likely to have full-time faculty appointments, fewer had NIH grants, and those in the most recent graduation cohort at the time of the survey reported spending less time on research than men. Previously cited reasons for these differences include disproportionate childcare responsibilities, a paucity of role models, insufficient recognition, and gender bias. Institutions can and should address these obstacles, but training programs can help by preparing their graduates to succeed despite the systemic obstacles. The alternative is a persistent gender gap in the physician-scientist workforce, lost opportunities to benefit from diverse perspectives, and a diminished impact of valuable training resources.

Authors

Lawrence F. Brass, Myles H. Akabas

×

Figure 3

Applicants and applicant success.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
Applicants and applicant success.
(A) The number of applicants to MD-PhD...
(A) The number of applicants to MD-PhD programs (2014-2024). See Supplemental Table 1 (supplemental material available online with this article; https:// doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.184715DS1). (B) Applicant success rate for MD-PhD programs (2006–2023). The numbers shown were derived by dividing the number of matriculants from each of those years (see Figure 1A) by the number of applicants in those same years. See Supplemental Table 2. (C) The success rate for applicants to medical school was derived by dividing the number of matriculants by the number of applicants. See Supplemental Table 3. Note: The AAMC routinely updates information about applicants to MD-PhD programs, causing the numbers for past years to change over time. To prepare the graphs shown in A and B, a unified applicant dataset from 2006 to 2024 was constructed as follows. Applicant data from 2006 to 2009 are from saved versions of AAMC Data Table 32 for those years. Data Table 32 is no longer posted online but is available by request from the AAMC data unit, as are applicant numbers from 2021 to 2024. Applicant numbers 2010–2020 are from ref. 4. The complete dataset constructed in this manner is included in Supplemental Tables 1 and 2.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts