White, Andrea T.

AbstractBackgroundHospital medicine (HM) has a well‐described gender disparity related to academic work and promotion. During the COVID‐19 pandemic, female authorship across medicine fell further behind historical averages.ObjectiveExamine how COVID‐19 affected the publication gender gap for hospitalists.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsBibliometric analysis to determine gender and specialty of US‐based physician first and last authors of COVID‐19 articles published March 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 in the four highest impact general medical journals and two highest impact HM‐specific journals.Main Outcome and MeasuresWe characterized the percentage of all physician authors that were women, the percentage of physician authors that were hospitalists, and the percentage of HM authors that were women. We compared author gender between general medical and HM‐specific journals.ResultsDuring the study period, 853 manuscripts with US‐based first or last authors were published in eligible journals. Included manuscripts contained 1124 US‐based physician first or last author credits, of which 34.2% (384) were women and 8.8% (99) were hospitalists. Among hospitalist author credits, 43.4% (n = 43/99) were occupied by women. The relative gender equity for hospitalist authors was driven by the two HM journals where, compared to the four general medical journals, hospitalist authors (54.1% [33/61] vs. 26.3% [10/38] women, respectively, p = .002) and hospitalist last authors (51.9% [14/27] vs. 20% [4/20], p = .03) were more likely to be women.ConclusionsAcross COVID‐19‐related manuscripts, disparities by gender were driven by the high‐impact general medical journals. HM‐specific journals had more equitable inclusion of women authors, demonstrating the potential impact of proactive editorial policies on diversity.

Abstract Background Strategies to optimize antibiotic prescribing at discharge are not well understood. Methods In fall 2019, we surveyed 39 Michigan hospitals on their antibiotic stewardship strategies. The association of reported strategies with discharge antibiotic overuse (unnecessary, excess, suboptimal fluoroquinolones) for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and urinary tract infection (UTI) was evaluated in 2 ways: (1) all strategies assumed equal weight and (2) strategies were weighted based on the ROAD (Reducing Overuse of Antibiotics at Discharge) Home Framework (ie, Tier 1—Critical infrastructure, Tier 2—Broad inpatient interventions, Tier 3—Discharge-specific strategies) with Tier 3 strategies receiving the highest weight. Results Between 1 July 2017 and 30 July 2019, 39 hospitals with 20 444 patients (56.5% CAP; 43.5% UTI) were included. Survey response was 100%. Hospitals reported a median (interquartile range [IQR]) 12 (9–14) of 34 possible stewardship strategies. On analyses of individual stewardship strategies, the Tier 3 intervention, review of antibiotics prior to discharge, was the only strategy consistently associated with lower antibiotic overuse at discharge (adjusted incident rate ratio [aIRR] 0.543, 95% confidence interval [CI]: .335–.878). On multivariable analysis, weighting by ROAD Home tier predicted antibiotic overuse at discharge for both CAP and UTI. For diseases combined, having more weighted strategies was associated with lower antibiotic overuse at discharge (aIRR 0.957, 95% CI: .927–.987, per weighted intervention); discharge-specific stewardship strategies were associated with a 12.4% relative decrease in antibiotic overuse days at discharge. Conclusions The more stewardship strategies a hospital reported, the lower its antibiotic overuse at discharge. However, Tier 3, or discharge-specific strategies, appeared to have the largest effect on antibiotic prescribing at discharge.