PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
18 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Gender Trends in Academic Radiology Publication in the United States Revisited Open PDF(2018) ;O'Connor, Erin E. ;Chen, Pauline ;Weston, Brian ;Anderson, RedmondZeffiro, TimothyRATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Although substantial increases in publications by female academic radiologists have appeared over the last several decades, it is possible that the rate of increase is decreasing. We examined temporal trends in gender composition for full-time radiology faculty, radiology residents, and medical students over a 46-year period. METHODS: We examined authorship gender trends to determine if the increases in female authorship seen since 1970 have been sustained in recent years and whether female radiologists continue to publish in proportion to their numbers in academic departments. Original articles for selected years in Radiology and in the American Journal of Roentgenology between 1970 and 2016 were examined to determine the gender of first, corresponding, and last authors. Generalized linear models evaluated (1) changes in proportions of female authorship over time and (2) associations between proportions of female authorship and female radiology faculty representation. RESULTS: While linear increases in first, corresponding, and senior authorships were observed for female radiologists from 1970 to 2000, the rate of increase in female first and corresponding authorships then changed, with the slope of the first author relationship decreasing from 0.81 to 0.34, corresponding to 47% fewer female first authors added per year. In contrast, the proportion of female last authorship continued to increase at the same rate. The proportion of female first authorship was linearly related to the proportion of female radiology faculty from 1970 to 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Annual increases in first author academic productivity of female radiologists have lessened in the past 16 years, possibly related to reductions in the growth of female radiology faculty and trainees. As mixed, compared to homogeneous gender, authorship teams are associated with more citations, efforts to encourage more women to pursue careers in academic radiology could benefit the radiology research community.Item type:Publication, Assessing the gap in female authorship in the journal Emergency Radiology: trends over a 20-year period Open PDF(2017) ;McKenzie, K. ;Ramonas, M. ;Patlas, M.Katz, D.S.Purpose: To examine trends in female authorship in the journal Emergency Radiology from January 1994 to December 2014. Methods: We obtained institutional review board approval for our study. We retrospectively reviewed a total of 1617 articles published in the journal Emergency Radiology over a 20-year period. Original articles, case reports, review articles, and pictorial essays were included. The first and last position author’s gender was categorized as female or male. We analyzed trends by comparing the first and last position authors of original articles from the first and last year reviewed. We utilized Chi-square test for statistical analysis, with a p value <0.05 noted as significant. Results: One thousand four hundred twenty articles met our inclusion criteria. There were 1420 first position authors and 1295 last position authors. There were 125 articles that had a sole author—these authors were considered as first position authors only. We determined, as best as possible, the gender of 96% of the authors. Overall, female authors were 21% of first position authors (290 of 1368) and 15% of last position authors (183 of 1246). Thirty-two percent of articles with female last position authors also had female first position authors (58 of 183). There was a statistically significant increase in female last position authors, from 12.9% in 1994 to 21.3% in 2014 (p = 0.026), a non-significant increase in female first position authors, from 17.5% in 1994 to 20.9% in 2014 (p = 0.514), and a non-significant increase in articles with both a first and last female author, from 25% in 1994 to 35% in 2014 (p = 0.593). Conclusion: Over the last 20 years, there has been a statistically significant upward trend in female last position authors publishing in the journal Emergency Radiology. © 2017, American Society of Emergency Radiology.Item type:Publication, Assessing the gap in female authorship in radiology: Trends over the past two decades Open PDF(2015) ;Liang, T. ;Zhang, C. ;Khara, R.M.Harris, A.C.Purpose The aim of this study was to retrospectively identify trends in the representation of female authorship in prominent general radiology journals over the past 2 decades. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted for all articles published in 1993, 2003, and 2013 in Radiology, the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR), European Radiology, and Investigative Radiology. The genders of the first and last authors were collected. Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis, and P values <.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Results A total of 3,786 articles were reviewed. Overall, women constituted 20.0% authorship, 24.7% of first authors, and 15.2% of senior authors. The average overall female first and senior authorship grew from 19.7% to 32.1% and from 13.6% to 19.1%, respectively from 1993 to 2013. Female first authorship grew over the past 2 decades in the journals reviewed, with significant growth in AJR and Radiology (P <.0001). Female first authorship in the individual journals grew from 16.4%-29.1% in 1993, to 29.1%-34.8% in 2013. Female senior authorship also demonstrated growth in the past 2 decades, growing from 4.3%-17.5% in 1993 to 15.5%-23.2% in 2013. There was significant growth in senior female authorship in Radiology (from 12.1% to 19.2%, P =.004) and European Radiology (from 4.3% to 15.5%, P =.0433). Female senior authorship remained significantly lower than first authorship over the past 2 decades (P =.002, P <.001, and P <.0001). Conclusions Although women's growth in first authorship in radiology literature is proportional to their growth in the specialty, they continue to remain a minority, especially in senior authorship, and demonstrate similar participation to other medical specialties. © 2015 Published by Elsevier on behalf of American College of Radiology.Item type:Publication, Declining racial and ethnic representation in clinical academic medicine: A longitudinal study of 16 US medical specialties Open PDF(2018) ;Lett, Elle ;Orji, Whitney U.Sebro, RonnieOBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in racial, ethnic, and sex representation at US medical schools across 16 specialties: internal medicine, pediatrics, surgery, psychiatry, radiology, anesthesiology, obstetrics and gynecology, neurology, family practice, pathology, emergency medicine, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and dermatology. Using a novel, Census-derived statistical measure of diversity, the S-score, we quantified the degree of underrepresentation for racial minority groups and female faculty by rank for assistant, associate, and full professors from 1990-2016. METHODS: This longitudinal study of faculty diversity uses data obtained from the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster from US allopathic medical schools. The proportion of professors of racial minority groups and female faculty by rank was compared to the US population based on data from the US Census Bureau. The Roster includes data on 52,939 clinical medical faculty in 1990, and 129,545 in 2016, at the assistant professor level or higher. The primary measure used in this study was the S-score, a measure of representation based on the probability of the observed frequency of faculty from a racial/ethnic group and sex, given the racial and ethnic distribution of the US. Pearson correlations and 95% confidence intervals for S-score with time were used to measure trends. RESULTS: Blacks and Hispanics showed statistically significant trends (p<0.05) towards increasing underrepresentation in most specialties and are more underrepresented in 2016 than in 1990 across all ranks and specialties analyzed, except for Black females in obstetrics & gynecology. White females were also underrepresented in many specialties and in a subset of specialties trended toward greater underrepresentation. CONCLUSIONS: Current efforts to improve faculty diversity are inadequate in generating an academic physician workforce that represents the diversity of the US. More aggressive measures for faculty recruitment, retention, and promotion are necessary to reach equity in academia and healthcare.Item type:Publication, Reviewing the reviewers: comparison of review quality and reviewer characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology Open PDF(2005) ;Kliewer, Mark A. ;Freed, Kelly S. ;DeLong, David M. ;Pickhardt, Perry J.Provenzale, James M.OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine which manuscript reviewer characteristics are most strongly associated with reviewer performance as judged by editors of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At the AJR, manuscript reviews are rated by the journal editors on a subjective scale from 1 (lowest) to 4, on the basis of the value, thoroughness, and punctuality of the critique. We obtained all scores for AJR reviewers and determined the average score for each reviewer. We also sent a questionnaire to 989 reviewers requesting specific information regarding the age, sex, radiology subspecialty, number of years serving as a reviewer, academic rank, and practice type of the reviewer. The demographic profiles were correlated with the average quality score for each reviewer. Statistical analysis included correlation analysis and analysis of variance modeling. Reviewer quality scores were also correlated with the scoring of individual reviews and ultimate disposition of 196 manuscripts sent to the AJR during the same period. RESULTS: Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 821 reviewers (83.0%), for whom quality scores were available for 714 (87.0%). Correlation analysis shows that the quality score of reviewers strongly correlated with younger age (p = 0.001). A statistically significant correlation between quality score and practice type was seen (p = 0.008), with reviewers from academic institutions receiving higher scores. No significant correlation was found between quality score and sex (p = 0.72), years of reviewing (p = 0.26), academic rank (p = 0.10), or the ultimate disposition of the manuscript (p = 0.40). The quality score of the reviewers showed no variation by subspecialty (p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: The highest-rated AJR reviewers tended to be young and from academic institutions. The quality of peer review did not correlate with the sex, academic rank, or subspecialty of the reviewer.Item type:Publication, Gender differences in the publication rate among breast imaging radiologists in the United States and Canada Open PDF(2018) ;Khurshid, K. ;Shah, S. ;Ahmadi, M. ;Jalal, S.Carlos, R.OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to determine whether academic achievement differs by gender among breast imaging radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We examined the gender disparity in academic breast radiology using several parameters, including the h-index, the number of publications, and the number of citations. We also inspected gender disparity in academic ranks and leadership ranks. RESULTS. The research productivity of female breast imagers was found to be significantly lower than that of male colleagues across all academic ranks (p < 0.001). In addition, no correlation was noted between female gender and leadership positions (p = 0.57), despite the fact that women dominate the specialty of breast imaging. CONCLUSION. The number of publications by female radiologists has risen steadily over time; however, a significant gender disparity is seen in scholarly productivity. �© American Roentgen Ray Society.Item type:Publication, Qualitative Assessment of Academic Radiation Oncology Department Chairs' Insights on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Progress, Challenges, and Future Aspirations. Open PDF(2018) ;Jones, Rochelle D. ;Chapman, Christina H. ;Holliday, Emma B. ;Lalani, NafishaWilson, EmilyPURPOSE: A lack of diversity has been observed in radiation oncology (RO), with women and certain racial/ethnic groups underrepresented as trainees, faculty, and practicing physicians. We sought to gain a nuanced understanding of how to best promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) based on the insights of RO department chairs, with particular attention given to the experiences of the few women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) in these influential positions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From March to June 2016, we conducted telephone interviews with 24 RO department chairs (of 27 invited). Purposive sampling was used to invite all chairs who were women (n = 13) or URMs (n = 3) and 11 male chairs who were not URMs. Multiple analysts coded the verbatim transcripts. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: (1) commitment to DEI promotes quality health care and innovation; (2) gaps remain despite some progress with promoting diversity in RO; (3) women and URM faculty continue to experience challenges in various career domains; (4) solutions to DEI issues would be facilitated by acknowledging realities of gender and race; and (5) expansion of the career pipeline is needed. CONCLUSIONS: The chairs' insights had policy-relevant implications. Bias training should broach tokenism, blindness, and intersectionality. Efforts to recruit and support diverse talent should be deliberate and proactive. Bridge programs could engage students before their application to medical school.Item type:Publication, Underrepresentation of Women on Radiology Editorial Boards. Open PDF(2019) ;Jalilianhasanpour, Rozita ;Charkhchi, Paniz ;Mirbolouk, MohammadhassanYousem, David M.PURPOSE: Women in radiology are known to be underrepresented in academic leadership positions. We sought to determine if women are appropriately represented on editorial boards and editor-in-chief positions compared with their authorship contributions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed the first and senior authorship male versus female gender breakdown of manuscripts published in nine high-impact American radiology journals 1 month per year from 2002 to 2017. We looked at the gender of the first authors, senior authors, editorial board members, and editors-in-chief of these journals to see if there was a gender discrepancy. RESULTS: We assessed 3,702 first authors, 3,702 senior authors, and 9,400 editorial board members. Women were underrepresented on the editorial boards compared with their first-authored manuscript contribution in our sample of articles from every journal for every year and were underrepresented compared with their senior-authored manuscript contributions in 119 of 139 (85.6%) journal-years. The percentage of women as first authors (mean = 29.3 ± 9.9), senior authors (mean = 20.7 ± 8.1), and editorial board members (mean = 13.4 ± 6.5) showed major differences (P < .001). This gap did not significantly narrow over the 16 years of study. Notably, there was no woman as editor-in-chief for any of the journal-years. CONCLUSION: There is a gender gap in the composition of editorial boards in radiology compared with authorship contributions by women. Given the implications of editorial board assignment and editorship on women's academic advancement, journals may wish to consider strategies that will narrow the gap.Item type:Publication, Prevalence of female authors in case reports published in the medical literature Open PDF(2019) ;Hsiehchen, D. ;Hsieh, A.Espinoza, M.IMPORTANCE Underrepresentation of female authors in research publications is prevalent, but it is unclear whether this is attributable to sex disparities in research conduct or authorship practices. Case reports are a poorly understood component of the biomedical corpus, and the production of anecdotal observations is not confounded by factors associated with disparities in female representation in research publications. Whether female authorship disparities exist in nonresearch publications of clinical information is unknown. OBJECTIVES To examine the authorship of case reports and elucidate factors associated with sex disparity. DESIGN AND SETTING Cross-sectional study of all case reports published by US authors in 2014 and 2015 indexed in PubMed performed from July 2015 to July 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome measure was the proportion of female first authors. The secondary outcome measures were the proportion of female last authors and female authorship representation among different clinical specialties. RESULTS Bibliometric data was abstracted from 20 427 case reports published across 2538 journals. A total of 7252 (36%) and 4825 (25%) case reports had a female first and last author, respectively. In comparison, 44%and 34%of US trainees and physicians, respectively, were female in 2015. Among adult case reports, female authorship was more prevalent in academic environments compared with community settings (34.0%vs 28.2%for female first authors and 23.4%vs 19.7% for female last authors). Across states, the proportions of female first authors and last authors were universally less than the proportions of female trainees and active female physicians, respectively. Female first authorship was associated with larger author teams (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95%CI, 1.01-1.03), an academic affiliation (OR, 1.16; 95%CI, 1.06-1.27), and a female last author (OR, 1.58; 95%CI, 1.47-1.70). Relative to general internal medicine, specialties dominated by male clinicians were less frequently associated with female first authors. Several exceptions displaying a relatively equivalent tendency for male and female first authorship included oncology (OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.81-1.16), ophthalmology (OR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.72-1.05), and radiation oncology (OR, 0.94 95%CI, 0.56-1.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The underrepresentation of women among first and last authors in publications of case reports underscores the pervasiveness of sex disparities in medicine. Collaboration and female mentors may be critical instruments in upsetting longstanding practices associated with sex bias. Not all clinical specialties were associated with lower-than-expected female authorship, and further exploration of specialty-specific norms in publication and mentorship may elucidate specific barriers to female authorship. © 2019 JAMA Network Open.All right reserved.Item type:Publication, Gender trends in radiology authorship: A 35-year analysis Open PDF(2016) ;Piper, C.L. ;Scheel, J.R. ;Lee, C.I.Forman, H.P.Objective. The purpose of this study was to describe trends over time in female authorship in the radiology literature and to investigate the tendency of female first authors to publish with female senior authors. Materials and Methods. Data on the gender of academic physician authors based in the United States for all major articles published in three general radiology journals-Radiology, AJR, and Academic Radiology-were collected and analyzed for the years 1978, 1988, 1998, 2008, and 2013. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify significant trends over time, and a chi-square test of independence was performed to determine significant relations between the genders of first and senior authors. Results. The gender of 4182 of 4217 (99.17%) authors with MD degrees was determined. The proportion of original research articles published by women as first authors increased from 8.33% in 1978 to 32.35% in 2013 (p < 0.001). The proportion of original research articles with women as senior authors increased from 6.75% in 1978 to 21.90% in 2013 (p < 0.001). Female first and senior authorship increased significantly over time (first author, p < 0.001; senior author, p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant relation between the genders of first and senior authors of original research articles and guest editorials (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Over 35 years, there was a statistically significant upward linear trend of female physician participation in authorship of academic radiology literature. Female first authors were more likely to publish with female senior authors. © American Roentgen Ray Society.