Breaking the glass ceiling: women's scientific participation in the 24th World Congress of Psychiatry

Diversity in academic and professional meetings is essential for fostering innovation, inclusive dialogue, and equitable representation of voices from varied backgrounds. Scientific meetings serve as critical platforms for knowledge exchange, cross-cultural collaboration, and professional networking1, 2. They also enhance the visibility of clinicians and academics, facilitating recognition and professional growth3. However, ensuring diverse participation across dimensions such as gender, ethnicity, geographic regions, and professional standing remains challenging. The increasing number of women working in medicine and academia reflects societal changes and the efforts of individuals and organizations over the years4. Previous research has explored women's participation in medical congresses, showing a strong positive correlation between the proportion of women on planning committees and the representation of women as speakers5. This highlights the importance of involving women in decision-making roles to improve gender equity. The WPA Action Plan 2023-2026 emphasizes the goal of achieving equality across genders, developmental stages, inclusivity, and transcultural facets (EDIT) in clinical and public mental health practices, as well as in research6. Systematically collecting and reporting data on the diversity of participants and speakers at WPA meetings can inform targeted initiatives and allow to measure progress over time. This piece represents a step in this direction, by analyzing women's representation among the scientific speakers at the 24th World Congress of Psychiatry, held in Mexico City from 14 to 17 November 2024. The Congress attracted 1,730 abstract submissions, of which 1,685 were accepted. The contributions included in the final program were 1,383. Women submitted 51% of the total abstracts, had a slightly higher (52%) acceptance rate, but accounted for 49% of the final program contributions. This slight discrepancy between acceptance rate and actual contribution may raise questions about the potential barriers preventing women from attending meetings, even when their work is accepted. The representation of women was balanced in the presidential symposia (50%) and accepted symposia (50%). However, men remained predominant in courses (70%), Spanish language sessions (69%), meet-the-experts sessions (67%), state-of-the-art symposia (65%), distinguished lectures (63%), and panel discussions (56%). In contrast, women were more represented in the short oral poster presentations (53%) and e-poster viewings (51%). This distribution may, in part, reflect long-standing structural inequities that have historically limited opportunities for women to reach senior positions, while keeping them concentrated in junior roles, a concept that has been described as “sticky floor”. Interestingly, gender trends were apparent in the thematic content of presentations. For example, in the short oral poster presentations, some topics such as those concerning mental health users and caregivers were almost exclusively represented in contributions by women, whereas topics such as mental health economics, evolutionary psychiatry, and dissociative disorders appeared exclusively in contributions by men. Structural barriers contributing to gender disparities in meeting attendance have been identified in previous studies. Family obligations were reported as barriers by 55% of female and 37% of male parents/guardians; limited funding also hindered participation, with 38% of junior faculty reporting financial constraints8. Women are more likely to hold part-time or adjunct positions that do not provide funding for travel, further exacerbating these barriers8. Additional challenges include travel costs and difficulties in obtaining visas. Efforts to address these challenges could include securing travel grants for early career professionals, providing childcare support options at home or at the meeting, and enabling online meeting participation. Barriers to participation can also manifest during the events themselves. For example, studies have shown that men ask more and longer questions than women during meetings9. Women may not speak up in discussions or have shorter speaking times in presentations, further reducing their visibility10. Women psychiatrists have reported negative attitudes about their abilities in self-promotion and networking11. As meeting speakers serve as important role models, promoting women in prominent sessions is essential to fostering the professional aspirations of younger women2, 12. The 24th World Congress of Psychiatry has shown progress in promoting women among speakers. Ensuring gender diversity at meetings generates a ripple effect, inspiring institutions to adopt similar practices and fostering an inclusive professional ecosystem. Nevertheless, challenges remain. More work is necessary to achieve equitable representation across all demographic groups, from all continents and professional levels, to secure inclusion and promote meaningful participation and engagement of underrepresented groups. Collecting and analyzing data on the broader diversity of participants in meetings is important to visualize the nuances of under-representation. Women are often treated as a single, uniform group, neglecting the distinct experiences shaped by factors such as ethnicity, age, motherhood, or sexual orientation. Future research could integrate meeting program data with survey responses from attendees, capturing individual-level details, to better understand participation dynamics. Building on the achievements of this Congress, future events can move closer to the goal of the EDIT principles6.