PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Silver, Julie K.Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender composition of spasticity‐related clinical practice guideline authorship positions Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2025-03-17)
    Uhlig‐Reche, Hannah
    ;
    Jacobs, Jeremy W.
    ;
    Gaspard, Christine S.
    ;
    Silver, Julie K.
    ;
    Verduzco‐Gutierrez, Monica
    Background The authors of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are considered topic experts and specialists. Studies to date have disproportionately found that women are underrepresented in CPG authorship, but no studies have investigated CPGs on spasticity published in the recent literature. Objective To determine the gender composition of author positions on spasticity‐related CPGs published from 2014 to 2023. Design Retrospective review of literature. Setting Systematic literature search using PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL databases for spasticity‐related CPGs available in English and published between 2014 and 2023. Participants Authorship positions on spasticity‐related CPGs published during the defined study period. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Gender composition of all author positions and physician author positions on spasticity‐related CPGs published from 2014 to 2023 were compared with parity and equity benchmarks. The binomial test was used to assess for a difference in the observed versus expected distribution (parity) and the N – 1 χ2 test was used to compare the gender proportions of authorship positions with the gender proportions of the equity benchmarks. Results Six CPGs on spasticity were published during the study period. Most author positions were held by women (54.5%), whereas most physician author positions were held by men physicians (63%). Men physicians held significantly more positions compared with parity (p = .016). Women were overrepresented among all author positions compared with equity using total U.S. academic medicine faculty in neurology/physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) at all benchmark years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2014: 7.7–23.5; 2018: 4.2–20.0; 2022: 1.4–17.2). There was no difference in the gender composition of physician authors compared with academic medicine physicians in neurology/PM&R for any benchmark year (95% CI: 2014: −8.3 to 11.6; 2018: −2.0 to 7.9; 2022: −4.7 to 5.2). Conclusions Physician authorship of recent spasticity‐related CPGs comprises mostly men, a significant difference from parity but not from equity benchmarks. Women are overrepresented among total authorship positions (including nonphysicians) compared with equity, but not parity. Editorial boards should actively promote authorship diversity of these influential guidelines to minimize gender bias in health care delivery.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Faculty Diversity Trends by Sex, Race, and Ethnicity, 2007 to 2018 in the United States Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Zhang, Yanru
    ;
    Silver, Julie K.
    ;
    Tiwana, Sabeen
    ;
    Verduzco-Gutierrez, Monica
    ;
    Siddiqi, Javed
    INTRODUCTION: Sex and race/ethnicity disparities persist in academic Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R). This study contributes to the current body of knowledge by demonstrating changes in academic PM&R by sex and race/ethnicity in multiple categories over a 12-year period. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate workforce disparities in academic PM&R by measuring sex and race/ethnicity diversity in academic degree, rank, and tenure status. DESIGN: Surveillance study. SETTING AND METHODS: Self-reported data for PM&R from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) annual Faculty Roster report from 2007 to 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 12-year average percentage composition in academic degree, rank, and tenure status was calculated to compare the overall distribution. Counts and proportion changes were plotted to depict the temporal trends. Absolute changes in racial percentage composition were graphed to highlight the progress. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2018, the increase by sex was roughly equal (male = 216; female = 236), whereas most of the increase was in White faculty (207). The representation of female and Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) faculty decreased as academic level advanced. Instructors is the only category with a higher proportion of female faculty, from 2007 (53%) to 2018 (59.3%), whereas male faculty occupied over 75% of the full professor positions at any time. Among the non-White faculty, Asian faculty had the greatest increase in proportion of full professors (3.7% to 10%) and Hispanic/Latino faculty in associate professors (2% to 7.1%), whereas full professors who were Black/African American decreased from 4 persons (2.5%) to 2 persons (0.8%). CONCLUSION: An increase in total number of female and URiM faculty was observed in academic PM&R over 2007 to 2018, but sex and ethnicity/race disparities persisted, especially in higher ranks and leadership positions. For non-White faculty, greater disparities existed, pointing toward the need to target challenges faced by URiM race/ethnicity status.