HERZMEDIZIN: Looking back on your career, what factors, opportunities, or turning points have most strongly shaped your path in cardiology?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: From the moment I finished medical school, my ambition was clear: cardiology. At that time, this was a rare career choice for a woman at my hospital, and across the wider region. What sustained that ambition was – to a large extent – the period I spent training in cardiology at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland, as a recipient of a Swiss Government scholarship for foreign students. There, my mentors were women, and I saw first-hand that women could build full, successful careers in cardiology – that was probably the single most significant turning point in my path. Alongside my own determination, the support of my family, and of my husband throughout every stage of my training, was a decisive factor in becoming everything I am today.
HERZMEDIZIN: How would you describe the current status of women in cardiology in your country regarding career progression, leadership positions, and academic opportunities?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: Over the past decade or so, there has been a noticeably higher number of women entering cardiology. However, the number of women in leadership positions has not grown proportionally. Women are predominantly concentrated in non-invasive cardiology, which from the outset works against them being seen as suited for leadership roles – and, correspondingly, against equal pay. In terms of academic opportunities, women’s presence in academic careers is substantial across internal medicine as a whole. In cardiology specifically, however, that presence is considerably lower than in other branches of internal medicine.
HERZMEDIZIN: What structural, institutional, or cultural barriers continue to limit the advancement of women in cardiology?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: The greatest cultural barrier is probably the multiple roles expected of a woman. Above all, a woman is expected, at a relatively early stage of life, to start a family and have children. Women who have children are also, culturally, expected to carry the greatest share of responsibility toward those children – and toward the family more broadly, as a parent. Institutionally, men are still perceived as easier to reach agreements with, as people who do not ask too many questions. There is a cultural perception that women’s wish to be thorough – to ask questions, to prepare every detail adequately, and to be properly informed before deciding – is not recognized as a strength but is instead perceived as a kind of weakness.
HERZMEDIZIN: How well are women represented in procedural subspecialties such as interventional or structural cardiology, and what factors influence their participation in these fields?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: Women’s representation in fields such as interventional cardiology remains low, and the reasons connect directly to my answer to the last question: starting a family. There is a concern that practicing interventional cardiology – with its radiation exposure – may affect a woman’s reproductive health. Women who do become mothers then fall further behind their male colleagues, again because of family obligations, and this significantly reduces their chances of ever taking on a leading or head position.
HERZMEDIZIN: How supportive are cardiology institutions in your country regarding pregnancy, parenthood, work-life integration, and flexible career pathways?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: In our country, institutionally, a woman is entitled to maternity leave of nine to twelve months after childbirth, depending on how much leave she had already taken during the pregnancy itself. During this period, she receives close to her full salary. However, if she is in the process of specialization training, this period does not count toward her training – meaning her specialization is extended by that same length of time. Upon returning to work, practically the only benefit a woman retains is exemption from night shifts until her child turns three. Institutionally, there is no option to reduce working hours on a part-time or percentage basis.
HERZMEDIZIN: What role have mentors, sponsors, professional societies, and Women in Cardiology initiatives played – or are still playing – in advancing women’s careers?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: In our country, and across the region more broadly, initiatives such as Women in Cardiology are still in their infancy and have not yet had a meaningful impact on advancing women’s careers in cardiology. As for sponsors, their interest is driven almost exclusively by position – that is, by leadership roles – and by continuous presence at work. In effect, this means that any absence linked to childbirth significantly reduces a sponsor’s interest in supporting a woman’s further professional development.
HERZMEDIZIN: Looking ahead, what changes do you believe are most important to achieve greater gender equity in cardiology, and what advice would you give to the next generation of women entering the field?
Kovacevic-Preradovic: I believe that international initiatives of this kind, such as Women in Cardiology – especially when actively promoted by women holding leading roles in cardiology regionally, across Europe, and globally – could, in the future, partly influence national institutions to change their policies and create conditions that would allow women who wish to build a career in cardiology, while also fulfilling their role as mothers, to have better conditions for professional development.
To the overview page Women in Cardiology
To the overview page international content
