Actionable companion · Leadership practice and organizational learning

From leadership research to district action: Gender and Leadership Trajectories in Academic Dentistry

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

ABSTRACT Objectives Despite increased number of women entering dental academia in the last decade, gender disparities persist in leadership roles. This study examined gender trends within administrative leadership across U.S. dental schools. Materials and Methods Data on gender, age, employment status, academic rank and administrative title were extracted from the ADEA Survey of Dental School Faculty. Prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess gender representation in leadership over time, stratified by rank and age and adjusted for employment status (aPR). Results On average, women held fewer leadership roles than men (17.5% vs. 19.8%, p < 0.001), even after adjusting for employment status. Women were underrepresented in senior administrative positions such as department chairs (PRs = 0.57–0.81), division directors (PRs = 0.40–0.72) and deans (PRs = 0.46–0.62). Younger women were more likely to hold leadership roles than those aged ≥ 60. Conclusion While overrepresented as allied program directors and other nonspecific directorships, women continue to be underrepresented in more senior leadership roles, underscoring the need for systemic reform. Women continue to hold fewer senior leadership roles than men, emphasising the need for systemic change in policies and institutional culture to facilitate gender equity in academic dentistry.

A 90-day district inquiry

1. Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
2. Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one recurring leadership practice described in the source. Map its participants, incentives and constraints to a district setting, then design a small reversible staff pilot with an accountable owner. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
3. Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
4. Days 61–90 · Decide. Record implementation fidelity, staff review time, task quality and unintended burdens against a baseline. Use a comparison team where feasible and document alternative explanations before expanding. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Nikkita Madhu; Divya Kohli; Linda Sangalli. Gender and Leadership Trajectories in Academic Dentistry. European Journal of Dental Education (2026-02-12). https://doi.org/10.1111/eje.70109

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.