[Analogue vs. Digital: Gendered Perceptions of Endovascular Simulation-based Training]

Despite the increasing number of female medical graduates, women remain underrepresented in surgical leadership roles. Previous studies have highlighted gender disparities in operative autonomy, self-assessment, and psychological burden. Simulation-based training may offer a means to reduce such disparities. This study aimed to assess gender-specific differences in the evaluation of various endovascular training models.Between March and August 2024, 32 physicians (16 female, 16 male) from vascular surgery and radiology departments participated in a prospective study at the University Hospital in Innsbruck. Each participant performed a standardised iliac artery procedure using three training models: a flexible and a stiff 3D-printed vascular model, and a digital simulator. A structured questionnaire evaluated face validity, construct validity, and concurrent validity. Gender differences were analysed statistically.There were no significant gender differences in face validity ratings or model preferences. However, female participants consistently rated the construct validity of all models significantly higher (p < 0.05). Male participants had greater procedural experience, despite similar durations of professional experience. Both genders expressed strong support for regular simulation-based training.Simulation-based training is broadly recognised as a key educational tool across genders. The higher construct validity ratings by female participants suggest that simulation is perceived as a compensatory method for developing procedural skills. Structured implementation of simulation training may help reduce disparities in endovascular education.