Linden, Judith A.

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Women now comprise over half of US medical school matriculants yet remain underrepresented in academic leadership, including emergency medicine (EM). Leadership training within medical education is variable, particularly in communication, conflict management, negotiation, and operations. Concurrently, large language models (LLMs) are emerging as accessible tools to support leadership skill development. This study aimed to develop and evaluate an AI‐augmented leadership skills workshop designed to address the leadership gap for women in academic emergency medicine. Materials and Methods The Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) developed and piloted a leadership development workshop at the 2025 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Annual Meeting. The curriculum integrated evidence‐based leadership frameworks with experiential small‐group learning and structured demonstrations of LLM use. Educational strategies included brief didactics, reflection on lived leadership challenges, peer discussion, and guided LLM‐supported simulation of leadership conversations. Pre‐workshop and postworkshop surveys and qualitative feedback were collected to assess participant confidence and perceived utility. Results Participants demonstrated increased confidence in navigating power‐differential conversations and initiating negotiations following the workshop. There was greater reported intent to apply leadership frameworks and to utilize LLMs for leadership‐related tasks. Qualitative feedback highlighted themes of empowerment, practical applicability, and the importance of a psychologically safe, gender‐informed learning environment. Participants identified LLMs as a novel and accessible adjunct to traditional leadership development resources. Discussion and Conclusions An AI‐augmented, experiential leadership workshop is a feasible and scalable approach to addressing persistent leadership development gaps for women in academic emergency medicine. Integrating LLM‐supported practice with established leadership frameworks may enhance learner confidence and engagement. This model offers a practical strategy to support leadership skills for women physicians needed to navigate systemic barriers and advance into leadership roles.

AbstractObjectiveCareer paths leading to department chair positions are elusive. Women represent only 11% of academic emergency department (ED) chairs. It is unclear whether the pathway to chair is different for men and women; the characteristics, achievements, and qualifications among those who become ED chairs is unknown.MethodsThis study is a cross‐sectional analysis of curriculum vitae (CV) of current ED chairs in departments with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)‐accredited residency programs. Former women chairs were included due to paucity of current women chairs. Statistics were calculated using bivariate and multivariate analysis.ResultsOf 163 eligible chairs, 88 CV (54%) were obtained, including six former women chairs. A majority (86.4%) self‐identified as White/Caucasian, 21.5% were women, 46% were chief residents, 28.4% completed additional postgraduate degrees, and 21.8% were fellowship trained. At time of chair appointment, 58% were professor rank, 53.5% held ED operations roles, and 32% served as vice chair. Women were more likely to be in educational (53% vs. 22%) versus operational (26% vs. 61%, p = 0.02) roles. Women obtained more advanced degrees (47% vs. 25%, p = 0.02), were awarded more nonfederal grants (median = 7 vs. 3, p = 0.04), and achieved more national committee leadership (median = 4 vs. 1, p = 0.02). There were no gender differences in fellowship training, awards, leadership training programs, publications, federal grants, or national/international lectures after adjusting for years in practice.ConclusionWhile the majority of chairs held prior leadership roles in ED operations, only one in five women chairs did, suggesting gender differences in the path to chair attainment. These differences in paths may contribute to persistent gender disparities in ED chairs and may be influenced by career path choices, implicit bias, and structural barriers.