PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Svider, P.F.

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item type:Publication,
    A gender-based comparison of academic rank and scholarly productivity in academic neurological surgery Open PDF 
    (2014)
    Tomei, K.L.
    ;
    Nahass, M.M.
    ;
    Husain, Q.
    ;
    Agarwal, N.
    ;
    Patel, S.K.
    The number of women pursuing training opportunities in neurological surgery has increased, although they are still underrepresented at senior positions relative to junior academic ranks. Research productivity is an important component of the academic advancement process. We sought to use the h-index, a bibliometric previously analyzed among neurological surgeons, to evaluate whether there are gender differences in academic rank and research productivity among academic neurological surgeons. The h-index was calculated for 1052 academic neurological surgeons from 84 institutions, and organized by gender and academic rank. Overall men had statistically higher research productivity (mean 13.3) than their female colleagues (mean 9.5), as measured by the h-index, in the overall sample (p < 0.0007). When separating by academic rank, there were no statistical differences (p > 0.05) in h-index at the assistant professor (mean 7.2 male, 6.3 female), associate professor (11.2 male, 10.8 female), and professor (20.0 male, 18.0 female) levels based on gender. There was insufficient data to determine significance at the chairperson rank, as there was only one female chairperson. Although overall gender differences in scholarly productivity were detected, these differences did not reach statistical significance upon controlling for academic rank. Women were grossly underrepresented at the level of chairpersons in this sample of 1052 academic neurological surgeons, likely a result of the low proportion of females in this specialty. Future studies may be needed to investigate gender-specific research trends for neurosurgical residents, a cohort that in recent years has seen increased representation by women. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparity among US anaesthesiologists: Are women underrepresented in academic ranks and scholarly productivity? Open PDF 
    (2013)
    Pashkova, A.A.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    ;
    Chang, C.Y.
    ;
    Diaz, L.
    ;
    Eloy, J.A.
    Introduction The h-index is an objective indicator of research productivity and influence on scholarly discourse within a discipline. It may be a valuable adjunct for measuring research productivity, a key component in decisions regarding appointment and promotion in academic medicine. The objectives of this analysis were to (1) examine whether there are gender disparities in research productivity among academic anaesthesiologists, and (2) compare results to measures of research productivity in other specialties. Methods A bibliometric analysis of faculty members from 25 academic anaesthesiology departments was performed using the Scopus database. Academic anaesthesiologists were organised by academic rank and gender. The h-index and publication range (in years) of faculty members were calculated. Results Male anaesthesiologists had higher research productivity, as measured by the h-index, than female colleagues. Organised by rank, this difference was noted only among full professors. Men had higher overall and early-career research productivity, while women had mid-career research productivity rates equivalent to and surpassing that of their male colleagues. Gender disparities in research productivity were also noted among a sample of academic physicians in other specialties. Conclusions While men had higher overall research productivity, women had equivalent or higher mid-career research output, suggesting that early-career considerations unique to women should be taken into account during appointment and promotion in academic anaesthesiology. While disparities in gender representation among anaesthesiologists have also been noted in Europe, further study as to whether these differences also extend to research productivity and academic promotion outside of the US would be of interest. © 2013 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Research productivity and gender disparities: A look at academic plastic surgery Open PDF 
    (2014)
    Paik, A.M.
    ;
    Mady, L.J.
    ;
    Villanueva, N.L.
    ;
    Goljo, E.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    Objectives The h-index has utility in examining the contributions of faculty members by quantifying both the amount and the quality of research output and as such is a metric in approximating academic productivity. The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate the relationship between h-index and academic rank in plastic surgery and (2) to describe the current gender representation in academic plastic surgery to assess whether there are any gender disparities in academic productivity. Design The h-index was used to evaluate the research contributions of plastic surgeons from academic departments in the United States. Results There were 426 (84%) men and 79 (16%) women in our sample. Those in higher academic ranks had higher h-index scores (p < 0.0005). There was a significant difference in overall mean h-index by gender, where the mean scores were 9.0 and 6.0 for men and women, respectively (p = 0.0005). When analyzed by academic rank, there was a significant difference in academic productivity between men and women in assistant and associate professor positions (6.4 vs 5.1, respectively; p = 0.04). Conclusions The h-index is able to objectively and reliably quantify academic productivity in plastic surgery. We found that h-indices increased with higher academic rank, and men had overall higher scores than their female colleagues. Adoption of this metric as an adjunct to other objective and subjective measures by promotions committees may provide a more reliable measure of research relevance and academic productivity in academic plastic surgery. © 2014 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. Allrights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in research productivity among 9952 academic physicians Open PDF 
    (2013)
    Eloy, J.A.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    ;
    Cherla, D.V.
    ;
    Diaz, L.
    ;
    Kovalerchik, O.
    Objectives/Hypothesis The number of women in medicine has increased considerably over the past 3 decades, and they now comprise approximately half of medical school matriculants. We examine whether gender disparities in research productivity are present throughout various specialties and compare these findings to those previously described among otolaryngologists. Study Design Bibliometric analysis. Methods Research productivity, measured by the h-index, was calculated for 9,952 academic physicians representing 34 medical specialties. Additionally, trends in how rate of research productivity changed throughout different career stages were compared. Results Women were underrepresented at the level of professor and in positions of departmental leadership relative to their representation among assistant and associate professors. Male faculty had statistically higher research productivity both overall (H = 10.3 ±0.14 vs. 5.6 ± 0.14) and at all academic ranks. For the overall sample, men and women appeared to have equivalent rates of research productivity. In internal medicine, men had higher early-career productivity, while female faculty had productivity equaling and even surpassing that of their male colleagues beyond 20 to 25 years. Men and women had equivalent productivity in surgical specialties throughout their careers, and similar rates in pediatrics until 25 to 30 years. Conclusions Female academic physicians have decreased research productivity relative to men, which may be one factor contributing to their underrepresentation at the level of professor and departmental leader relative to their proportions in junior academic ranks. Potential explanations may include fewer woman physicians in the age groups during which higher academic ranks are attained, greater family responsibilities, and greater involvement in clinical service and educational contributions. Level of Evidence N/A. Laryngoscope, 123:1865-1875, 2013 © 2013 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Regional differences in gender promotion and scholarly productivity in otolaryngology Open PDF 
    (2014)
    Eloy, J.A.
    ;
    Mady, L.J.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    ;
    Mauro, K.M.
    ;
    Kalyoussef, E.
    Objectives. To identify whether regional differences exist in gender disparities in scholarly productivity and faculty rank among academic otolaryngologists. Study Design and Setting. Academic otolaryngologists' bibliometric data analyses. Methods. Online faculty listings from 98 otolaryngology departments were organized by gender, academic rank, fellowship training status, and institutional location. The Scopus database was used to assess bibliometrics of these otolaryngologists, including the h-index, number of publications, and publication experience. Results. Analysis included 1127 otolaryngologists, 916 men (81.3%) and 211 women (18.7%). Female faculty comprised 15.4% in the Midwest, 18.8% in the Northeast, 21.3% in the South, and 19.0% in the West (P = .44). Overall, men obtained significantly higher senior academic ranks (associate professor or professor) compared to women (59.8% vs 40.2%, P <.0001). Regional gender differences in senior faculty were found in the South (59.8% men vs 37.3% women, P = .0003) and Northeast (56.4% men vs 24.1% women, P < .0001) with concomitant gender differences in scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index (South, P = .0003; Northeast, P = .0001). Among geographic subdivisions, female representation at senior ranks was lowest in the Mid-Atlantic (22.0%), New England (30.8%), and West South Central (33.3%), while highest in Pacific (60.0%) and Mountain (71.4%) regions. No regional gender differences were found in fellowship training patterns (P-values > .05). Conclusion. Gender disparities in academic rank and scholarly productivity exist most notably in the Northeast, where women in otolaryngology are most underrepresented relative to men at senior academic ranks and in scholarly productivity. © 2014 American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Foundation.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Association of gender with financial relationships between industry and academic otolaryngologists Open PDF 
    (2017)
    Eloy, J.A.
    ;
    Bobian, M.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    ;
    Culver, A.
    ;
    Siegel, B.
    Importance: Gender disparities continue to exist in the medical profession, including potential disparities in industry-supported financial contributions. Although there are potential drawbacks to industry relationships, such industry ties have the potential to promote scholarly discourse and increase understanding and accessibility of novel technologies and drugs. Objectives: To evaluate whether gender disparities exist in relationships between pharmaceutical and/or medical device industries and academic otolaryngologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: An analysis of bibliometric data and industry funding of academic otolaryngologists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Industry payments as reported within the CMS Open Payment Database. Methods: Online faculty listings were used to determine academic rank, fellowship training, and gender of full-time faculty otolaryngologists in the 100 civilian training programs in the United States. Industry contributions to these individuals were evaluated using the CMS Open Payment Database, which was created by the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in response to increasing public and regulatory interest in industry relationships and aimed to increase the transparency of such relationships. The Scopus database was used to determine bibliometric indices and publication experience (in years) for all academic otolaryngologists. Results: Of 1514 academic otolaryngologists included in this analysis, 1202 (79.4%) were men and 312 (20.6%) were women. In 2014, industry contributed a total of $4.9 million to academic otolaryngologists. $4.3 million (88.5%) of that went to men, in a population in which 79.4%are male. Male otolaryngologists received greater median contributions than did female otolaryngologists (median [interquartile range (IQR)], $211 [$86-$1245] vs $133 [$51-$316]). Median contributions were greater to men than women at assistant and associate professor academic ranks (median [IQR], $168 [$77-$492] vs $114 [$55-$290] and $240 [$87-$1314] vs $166 [$58-$328], respectively). Overall, a greater proportion of men received industry contributions than women (68.0%vs 56.1%,). By subspecialty, men had greater median contribution levels among otologists and rhinologists (median [IQR], $609 [$166-$6015] vs $153 [$56-$336] and $1134 [$286-$5276] vs $425 [$188-$721], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: A greater proportion of male vs female academic otolaryngologists receive contributions from industry. These differences persist after controlling for academic rank and experience. The gender disparities we have identified may be owing to men publishing earlier in their careers, with women often surpassing men later in their academic lives, or as a result of previously described gender disparities in scholarly impact and academic advancement. © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.