INTRODUCTION In 2001, the first histopathology training schools for first year trainees were opened, with good results. The scheme was implemented throughout England and Wales in 2004/5, and now first years are concentrated in 12 regional histopathology schools. Applicants for these histopathology specialty training schemes applied through a single appointment panel. A combination of applicant choice, interview ranking and special circumstances were used to match appointees to training schools. This increased the best candidates’ chances of gaining a post. However, it also decreased trainees’ control over where they work. We hypothesised that male and female trainees have different priorities. We expected female trainees to be more likely to have to juggle child care and home life with their academic needs when making their decision. 1 How Do Histopathology Trainees Choose Their Training School? SD Preston 1, S Cossins 2, RD Liebmann 3, AH McGregor 4 National Histopathology Training Schools’ Board. 1 - Specialty registrar and trainee representative, 2 - Training Schools Administrator, 3 - Vice-Chair and Recruitment Lead, 4 - Chair REFERENCES 1.Paice E. Women in Hospital Medicine. Clinical Medicine JRCPL 2001;1(5): Women in academic medicine. London, British Medical Association, Groysberg B. How star women build portable skills. Harvard Business Review, February 2008 METHODS This study took the form of an audit of how trainees chose their training school. An electronic form was sent as an attachment to all successful applicants to the England and Wales Histopathology Training Schools during the 2007 recruitment round. The forms were returned to the Training Schools office where they were anonymised before being analysed by a second investigator. The audit asked trainees about: Factors used in the applicant’s choice of training school Most important factor Sources and adequacy of information Opinion about fairness of the process The geographical areas offered were the same as given by the MTAS system used for the 2007 recruitment. The geographies were conterminous with deaneries, with the exception of London and the Kent, Surrey and Sussex deanery which were amalgamated as the Thames training school. Data from the audit were combined with data from the application form, and analysed using Microsoft Excel. DISCUSSION Are men the new women? Men are underrepresented in histopathology training compared to the wider population, and in comparison to the 60% of graduates from medical school who are women. Contrary to our expectations, male trainees are more likely to consider home and family when choosing where to work. Women in academic medicine. Female trainees have shown less interest in research than their male counterparts. This finding suggests that it will be difficult to increase the proportion of academics who are female, as targeted in the “Women in Academic Medicine” report. 2 An informed decision 44% of female trainees are dissatisfied with the information available to them when choosing their training school, yet were less likely to avail themselves of what was available. This could be because the resources are designed in an androcentric way. However, the data show that the number of sources of information used did not influence satisfaction, which suggests that women use information differently from men. An increased desire for information among women has been described in business, and is associated with success after recruitment. 3 Future work We will repeat this audit on the 2008 entry, to see if the findings are repeated. If the findings are consistent, we will have to examine ways in which appealing gynocentric information can be produced. We must work on attracting men into histopathology, and endeavour to interest female applicants in research RESULTS Responses 51 out of 65 (78%) trainees returned questionnaires (female 32/41, 78%, and male 19/24, 79%). Factors used in the decision Most parameters showed little difference between the sexes. However, female appointees were less likely than male appointees to consider children (13% v 26%), home ownership (34% v 53%) or research (16% v 37%) (Figure 1). The most important factor No female trainees cited research as the most important factor when choosing a training school, compared to 11% of male trainees (Figure 2). Opinions Female appointees were less satisfied with the information provided to help them select a training school (Figure 3), but used the training schools’ website (Figure 4) and most other sources of information less often, with the exception of talking to trainees and consultants in the schools (Figure 5). However, satisfied women used a similar mean number of information sources as dissatisfied women (2.3 sources vs. 2.8). Female appointees were less satisfied than male appointees with the matching process (81% v 89%). Figure 4: