Despite global efforts, gender disparities in oncology may persist. Understanding these disparities within the context of major conferences can inform strategies to promote gender inclusiveness in the field. This study evaluates the participation of women and men at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2024 congress, focusing on chairs, speakers and audience questioners.
Observational study.
152 recorded sessions of the ASCO 2024 annual meeting, one of the largest conferences in the field of oncology, available on the ASCO website.
Individuals serving as chairs, speakers and audience members who asked questions.
In this observational study, gender for chairs, speakers and audience questioners across 152 sessions of the ASCO 2024 congress was assessed by two independent reviewers using audio and video recordings. Speaking times for questions and responses were also evaluated. Statistical analyses, including 2 and unpaired t-tests, were conducted to analyse the data.
Women were well represented as chairs (n=124) and speakers (n=402) in 66% and 95% of sessions, respectively. However, only 21% of questions from the audience were posed by women, while 37% of questions were asked by men and 42% online or by chairs/speakers. Women were more likely to pose questions when the sessions were chaired by women (71% vs 53%; p=0.047). There were no statistically significant gender disparities concerning speaking time (questions: p=0.30; responses: 0.53). The response dynamics indicated a pattern of gender homogeneity, with individuals more frequently responding to questions from their own gender.
While the balanced representation of women in leadership roles at the ASCO 2024 congress reflects positive development in gender equality, disparities in active participation persist. These findings underscore the need for strategies that not only promote women in visible roles but also foster an environment that supports their active engagement in scientific discussions.
Flexible bronchoscopy (FB) is widely used for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in pulmonary medicine. However, FB can cause respiratory and haemodynamic complications, especially in patients with pre-existing lung and/or cardiovascular comorbidities. Despite the range of oxygenation and ventilatory approaches available to prevent these risks, evidence regarding their real-world application and clinical impact is limited. The OxyFOB study aims to assess the prevalence and outcomes of various oxygenation and ventilatory support strategies used during FB across Europe.
The OxyFOB study is a large, prospective, international, observational cohort study which aims to involve over 10 000 FB procedures across European centres. Eligible participants include all adults undergoing FB for diagnostic, therapeutic or procedural indications. Data are collected via a standardised electronic case report form and encompass demographic information, procedural details and clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint is the prevalence of oxygenation and ventilatory support strategies: conventional oxygen therapy, high-flow oxygen therapy, continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation and invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes include periprocedural respiratory and haemodynamic events, patient comfort, dyspnoea and postprocedural complications. Statistical analyses include descriptive statistics, subgroup comparisons and multivariate logistic regression.
The study has received ethical approval from the coordinating centre (protocol n. 22/2022 on the 20 January 2022, by the ‘Comitato Etico Sezione Area Centro - Regione Calabria’) and all participating sites. Informed consent is given from all patients or their legal representatives. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international meetings. Data will be managed and made available on reasonable request to support further research.
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05681962. Registered January 2023.