PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Khosa, F.Start date: 2020

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Chest Radiology in North America Open PDF 
    (2021)
    O'Neill, S.B.
    ;
    Maddu, K.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Yeo, S.
    ;
    Khurshid, K.
    Purpose: In the current cultural climate, gender disparity is a topical and contentious issue. In academic medicine, there is an underrepresentation of female faculty in leadership positions with lower research output and fewer grant awards. We study the gender differences in faculty rank, leadership positions, and research output among chest radiologists in North America. Materials and Methods: A list of clinical faculty at radiology programs in North America was obtained using the FREIDA database and program websites. Demographic information and data pertaining to academic rank, peer-reviewed publications, and research productivity of each chest radiologist was obtained from Doximity and SCOPUS databases. Results: Four hundred ten (281 male:129 female) academic chest radiologists were included. Females were underrepresented at senior faculty level accounting for 18.8% (n = 21) of full, 29.2% (n = 21) of associate and 40.7% (n = 61) of assistant professors. 23.1% (n = 14) of department chiefs were women. Women were more likely to occupy a faculty position in chest radiology in Canada than in US (P < 0.05). The median H-index, and numbers of publications and citations were lower for females than male faculty (P < 0.05). Male faculty had more years of experience – median of 19 years, 16.5 years for females (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Gender disparity exists in chest radiology with similar male predominance in terms of senior faculty rank, leadership roles, and research productivity to other medical specialties. The observed deficiency of research and scholarly output among female chest radiologists and the paucity of aspirational female radiologists in senior academic/leadership positions are factors which perpetuate this gender disparity and contribute to persistence of the gender pay gap. © 2019 Elsevier Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Radiology Society Committees and Leadership in North America and Comparison With Other Continents Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Maddu, K.
    ;
    Amin, P.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Mauricio, C.
    ;
    Norbash, A.
    Purpose: To evaluate gender distribution in radiology professional society leadership positions. Our study intends to assess and compare the gender distribution among leadership roles and professional society committee memberships of the radiology societies and seek an understanding of potential associations between gender, academic research metrics, institutional academic rank, and leadership roles. Methods: We identified radiology professional society committee members to assess relative gender composition in 28 radiology societies in North America, Europe, and Australia/New Zealand. The research metrics were obtained from the SCOPUS database and demographics and institutional affiliation through institutional websites' internet searches. Gender distribution by academic ranks and other discontinuous variables were analyzed using the Chi-Square test. Wallis tests. Results: Of the 3011 members of society committees, 67.9% were male, and 32.1% female. Among all the society members, the data showed that the proportion of committee members holding leadership positions was comparable between males (25.7%) and females (22.5%). However, when we did a subgroup analysis and disaggregated the data by leadership positions, we noted that among those who held the leadership positions, the proportion of males was more significant (n = 526, 70.7%) compared to females (n = 218, 29.3%). Overall, males had higher median publications, citations, H-indices, and active years of research (P< 0.0001). At all university academic ranks, men outnumbered females (P = 0.0015, Chi-square 15.38), with the most considerable disparity at the rank of professor (71.9% male, 28.1% female, P = 0.0003). Conclusion: There was male predominance amongst committee members in radiology societies. Our study found no significant differences between those in leadership positions, suggesting that once a member of a committee, females are equally likely as males to attain leadership positions. Analysis of committee members' academic rank and committee leaders demonstrated underrepresentation of females at higher academic ranks, and males overall had higher research metrics than females. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing sex and gender equity in submission guidelines of radiology journals: A cross-sectional study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Khosa, F.
    ;
    Stewart, M.
    ;
    Liu, L.
    ;
    Ding, J.
    ;
    Rahmim, O.
    Purpose: Our study aimed to determine the current percentage of gender and sex equity promoting (GSEP) radiology journals, defined as satisfying at least one criterion of the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) checklist, published by the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). A secondary objective was to compare characteristics of GSEP and non-GSEP journals. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis between June 24 and July 3, 2023, was conducted. The author submission guidelines of radiology journals with a 2021 Journal Impact Factor (JIF) were assessed according to the SAGER checklist. GSEP journals were defined as satisfying one or more SAGER checklist criteria in their research instructions. Bibliometric data and journal information were collected from the Journal Citation Reports and National Library of Medicine catalogue. Results: Only 39.7 % (52) of 132 journals satisfied at least one SAGER checklist criterion. Median 2021 JIFs were higher in GSEP journals (4.62, IQR: 3.73 – 5.21) than non-GSEP journals (2.70, IQR: 2.32) (p = 0.00). Median 2021 Journal Citation Index (JCI) scores were higher in GSEP (0.64, 0.56 – 0.73) than non-GSEP journals (0.97, 0.83 – 1.10) (p = 0.00). Cited half-life was shorter for GSEP (5.40, 4.80 – 6.50) than non-GSEP journals (6.70, 5.70 – 7.40) (p = 0.05). Elsevier published 33 of 52 of GSEP journals. Conclusion: 60.3% of radiology journals with a 2021 JIF do not meet a single SAGER checklist criterion in their author submission guidelines. GSEP journals had higher impact and source metrics and a shorter cited half-life. Publishers may play a significant role in promoting endorsement of the SAGER checklist in the author submission guidelines of radiology journals. © 2024 The Author(s)
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparity in dermatologic society leadership: A global perspective Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Karol, D.L.
    ;
    Sheriff, L.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Ding, J.
    ;
    Larson, A.R.
    Background: In the last half-century, there has been increased representation of women in medicine. Despite this increase, there continues to be underrepresentation of women in medical leadership positions. The objective of this study was to investigate the phenomenon of gender disparity in the leadership of professional societies of dermatology worldwide. Methods: Online databases were used to extract the names of global dermatologic societies. Individual society websites were accessed to obtain information on executive members. Data not available on society websites were obtained through internet searches. Scopus was used to obtain H-indexes and other bibliometric outcomes. Results: Our data collection spanned 92 countries, with 1733 society leaders identified and information available for 1710. In North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and the Middle East, women were in a minority in dermatology professional society leadership. In South America, Central America, and Africa, women were in a slight majority. Across all professional societies, the role of president was more frequently held by men (n = 95) as opposed to women (n = 75). Female leaders were less likely to hold concurrent academic positions as deans/chairpersons/directors (83.33%) than their male counterparts (92.06%). The median H-index of female leaders (9) was lower than that of men (14). Conclusion: Gender disparity exists in leadership positions in professional dermatology societies. Cultural/continental specific factors should be explored further. Enhancement of institutional support, mentorship, and sponsorship for female dermatologists should be encouraged. © 2020
  • Item type:Publication,
    National Institutes of Health: Gender Differences in Radiology Funding Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Jutras, M.
    ;
    Malekafzali, L.
    ;
    Jung, S.
    ;
    Das, P.
    ;
    Qamar, S.R.
    Rationale and Objective: Radiology has traditionally remained one of the most male-dominated specialties, although a higher proportion of women are now beginning to occupy roles as academic radiologists than their male counterparts. The present study investigated trends in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding within Diagnostic Radiology stratified by gender, and correlated with measures of academic output, including h-index. Materials and Methods: Data on funding was obtained from the online NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditure and Results for fiscal years 2016–2019, and information regarding each Principal Investigator (PI) was obtained from the Scopus database and departmental websites. Mann-Whitney U tests were performed on collected data for statistical comparison of continuous variables. Results: Of the 2929 grants included in this analysis, 1789 (61.07%) were awarded to male PIs and 1140 (38.9%) to female PIs. Among PIs holding a PhD degree, male PIs had a higher mean grant amount ($619,807.00) compared to female PIs ($158,486.00). Conclusion: Although female representation within academic radiology has been increasing, the mean NIH grants awarded to women is less than that awarded to men. Reasons for this are numerous and may include differential prioritization of career objectives among men and women, although such rationalization is inevitably speculative in nature. Significant gender differences in NIH funding were seen at the PhD level, and the strongest correlation between NIH funding and academic output was observed for the h-index of female PIs. These results underscore the fact that women are ostensibly being held to a higher academic standard than men in terms of funding decisions. © 2020 The Association of University Radiologists
  • Item type:Publication,
    Academic Radiology in North America: Underrepresentation of Women in Academic Ranks and Leadership Roles Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Qamar, S.R.
    ;
    Nayab, A.
    ;
    Walsh, J.
    ;
    Niu, B.
    ;
    Norbash, A.
    Introduction: Gender disparity persists in the top tiers of academic medicine and similar trends prevail in the leadership roles in North American academic institutions, despite an even gender balance of the medical graduates in North America. The purpose of our investigation was to study gender inequity in academic radiology in North America, by assessing and comparing the gender basis of academic rank and leadership roles as related to research productivity. Materials and Methods: The Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FRIEDA) and Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS) were searched to generate a database of gender and academic profiles of radiology faculty members across academic institutions in North America. Bibliometric data were collected utilizing Elsevier’s SCOPUS as the reference source. Descriptive analytics were assessed using the SPSS (IBM, NY). Results: Of 151 academic radiology institutions across North America, academic rank information was available for 2679 radiologists of which 66.7% (1787/2679) were men and 33.3% were women (892/2679). Assistant professor (n = 1430/2679) constituted of 60.6% men (n = 866/1430) and 39.4% women (n = 564/1430) (p < 0.001 for the United States and p < 0.002 for Canada). Amongst associate professors (n = 679/2679), 71.1% are men (n = 483/679) and 28.9% are women (n = 196/679) (p < 0.001 for both the United States and Canada), while full professor (n = 570/2679), 76.8% are men (n = 438/570) and 23.2% are women (n = 132/570) (p < 0.001 for both the United States and Canada). Leadership roles are held by 418 faculty members, out of which 71.3% are men (n = 298/418) and 28.7% are women (n = 120/418). Conclusion: The majority of women academic radiologists are seen at the lowest rank of assistant professor, and are underrepresented in leadership roles. Women radiologists have less academic literature measures when compared with their male counterparts at all three ranks. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Neurosurgery Literature: A 20-Year Analysis of Sex Trends in Authorship Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Farhan, S.A.
    ;
    Shahid, I.
    ;
    Siddiqi, J.
    ;
    Khosa, F.
    Background: Publications are considered a major factor for advancement in academia. An effort has been made to study authorship trends in neurosurgery publications. The objective of this study was to investigate authorship trends in the neurosurgery literature for the last 20 years (1998–2018). Methods: Articles for the years 1998, 2008, and 2018 were extracted from Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery, and World Neurosurgery for this retrospective study. Only original articles, case reports, and review articles were included. The gender of the first, senior, and corresponding author was determined. Subspecialty topic, type of paper, geographic origin of articles, and the number of citations for each article were also collected. Results: A total of 3912 articles were included. The number of articles, the total number of authors, and nonexperimental studies increased in the successive decades. A total of 744 women (19.0%) were first authors and 520 (13.3%) were senior authors of their respective publications. A decreasing trend (P < 0.05) was noted between female first authors and male senior authors over time. All 3 journals showed an increasing pattern of female authorships across the 2 decades. Conclusions: A rapid rise in female authorship positions in particular and authorship positions in general demonstrates the diversity that is slowly burgeoning to cater to perspectives and issues that require a multidimensional approach in neurosurgery. Increasing linkages among researchers in neurosurgery on a global scale are evident by the increase in multinational collaborations. Expansive efforts are needed at institutional and individual levels to eradicate sex-based pitfalls that hinder excellence in neurosurgery research. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.