PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

End date: 2019Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.Canada

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 17
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender gaps in North American research productivity: Examining faculty publication rates in Mexico, Canada, and the U.S.
    (Sense Publishers, 2012)
    Padilla-González, L.E.
    ;
    Metcalfe, A.S.
    ;
    Galaz-Fontes, J.F.
    ;
    Fisher, D.
    ;
    Snee, I.S.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Author-Reviewer Homophily in Peer Review
    (bioRxiv, 2019)
    Murray, Dakota
    ;
    Siler, Kyle
    ;
    Larivière, Vincent
    ;
    Chan, Wei Mun
    ;
    Collings, Andrew M.
    The fairness of scholarly peer review has been challenged by evidence of disparities in publication outcomes based on author demographic characteristics. To assess this, we conducted an exploratory analysis of peer review outcomes of 23,876 initial submissions and 7,192 full submissions that were submitted to the biosciences journal eLife between 2012 and 2017. Women and authors from nations outside of North America and Europe were underrepresented both as gatekeepers (editors and peer reviewers) and authors. We found evidence of a homophilic relationship between the demographics of the gatekeepers and authors and the outcome of peer review; that is, there were higher rates of acceptance in the case of gender and country homophily. The acceptance rate for manuscripts with male last authors was seven percent, or 3.5 percentage points, greater than for female last authors (95% CI = [0.5, 6.4]); this gender inequity was greatest, at nine percent or about 4.8 percentage points (95% CI = [0.3, 9.1]), when the team of reviewers was all male; this difference was smaller and not significantly different for mixed-gender reviewer teams. Homogeny between countries of the gatekeeper and the corresponding author was also associated with higher acceptance rates for many countries. To test for the persistence of these effects after controlling for potentially confounding variables, we conducted a logistic regression including document and author metadata. Disparities in acceptance rates associated with gender and country of affiliation and the homophilic associations remained. We conclude with a discussion of mechanisms that could contribute to this effect, directions for future research, and policy implications. Code and anonymized data have been made available at https://github.com/murrayds/elife-analysis Author summary Peer review, the primary method by which scientific work is evaluated, is ideally a fair and equitable process in which scientific work is judged solely on its own merit. However, the integrity of peer review has been called into question based on evidence that outcomes often differ between male and female authors, and for authors in different countries. We investigated such disparities at the biosciences journal eLife by analyzing the demographics of authors and gatekeepers (editors and peer reviewers), and peer review outcomes of all submissions between 2012 and 2017. Outcomes were more favorable for male authors and those affiliated with institutions in North America and Europe; these groups were also over-represented among gatekeepers. There was evidence that peer review outcomes were influenced by homophily —a preference of gatekeepers for manuscripts from authors with shared characteristics. We discuss mechanisms that could contribute to this effect, directions for future research, and policy implications.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The foundation and consequences of gender bias in grant peer review processes Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Morgan, Rosemary
    ;
    Hawkins, Kate
    ;
    Lundine, Jamie
    KEY POINTS Gender bias within the research grant review process worldwide is a manifestation of historical and systemic gender bias within academic institutions and beyond. For many reasons, women are underrepresented in academic leadership; their research is less frequently cited than that of men; and they may enjoy less credit for their published work than their male coauthors. Efforts to overhaul processes of research grant peer review must go hand in hand with larger projects that aim to shift traditional gender norms in academia through institutional policies that recognize gender bias and act to counter it.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in leadership positions among academic nuclear medicine specialists in Canada and the United States Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Moghimi, S.
    ;
    Khurshid, K.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Qamar, S.R.
    ;
    Nicolaou, S.
    OBJECTIVE. Despite equal representation of genders among medical students, women continue to be underrepresented in the field of academic diagnostic radiology. These differences are manifest across subspecialties in academic medicine and even in diagnostic radiology. There are limited data available addressing diversity among nuclear medicine specialists. Thus, our primary objective was to compare gender representation in academic and leadership positions among faculty members in nuclear medicine in Canada and the United States. Our secondary objective was to study the influences to account for the existing disparity in academic nuclear medicine. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) and Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS), we created a database of faculty members in nuclear medicine. For assessment of academic performance, the h-index, number of publications, number of citations, and years of active research were extracted using Scopus. RESULTS. The academic ranks of 237 faculty members were used for analysis; of this group, 16.95% of associate professors were female. Women were less frequently represented in higher academic ranks, and women were also less frequently represented in leadership ranks (13.6% female vs 86.4% male). The h-index was comparable across genders. CONCLUSION. Female nuclear medicine specialists are underrepresented in academic and leadership positions compared with their male counterparts. This difference in numbers is unlikely to be because of academic performance given that both genders had comparable academic performance metrics in our study. The results show the need for devising strategies to promote diversity in academic and leadership positions across nuclear medicine specialists. © American Roentgen Ray Society.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex distribution and sex data handling in published otolaryngology research Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Liang, Jennifer J.
    ;
    Belcastro, Alexandra
    ;
    Levi, Jessica
    Objectives/Hypothesis To characterize the sex distribution and sex data handling in published otolaryngology research. Study Design Published research data analysis. Methods The total number of male and female participants, study characteristics, and sex data handling were abstracted from all original studies containing human participants published in five major otolaryngology journals from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 and January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006. Results Of the 1,128 studies from 2016 included in the analysis, 88.5% specified the sex of participants. There were 3,605,636 (42.1%) men and 4,515,508 (52.8%) women, with 429,006 (5.0%) participants unspecified. However, the average proportions of male and female participants (wherein studies are weighted the same, regardless of number of participants) were 0.579 and 0.421, respectively. Studies from the United States had a significantly higher proportion of women than studies from outside the United States. Subspecialties varied significantly in proportions. Average sex proportions in 2016 remained similar to those in 2006. For all studies, fewer than 40% of studies used any sex data for reporting of outcomes, for any sex-related analysis, or for discussion of results. Conclusions There was a higher average proportion of male participants than female. Studies originating in the United States included a greater number of female participants than those originating elsewhere, a possible result of explicit sex-inclusion policies governing research in the United States. Inclusion of women did not changed from 2006 to 2016, but analysis of sex data improved. Improvement of reporting, analysis, and discussion with regard to sex would benefit otolaryngology research and improve treatment for both sexes. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 129:E420–E427, 2019
  • 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,
    Analysis of H-index in Assessing Gender Differences in Academic Rank and Leadership in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation in the United States and Canada Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Yang, H.Y.
    ;
    Rhee, G.
    ;
    Xuan, L.
    ;
    Silver, J.K.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    Objectives The aims of the study were (1) to establish potential gender differences in academic physical medicine and rehabilitation faculty across the United States and Canada and (2) to evaluate associations between physician gender, leadership position, and research productivity. Design Physical medicine and rehabilitation programs enlisted in Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (n = 72) and Canadian Resident Matching Service (n = 9) were searched for academic faculty with Doctor of Medicine degrees to generate a database of gender and academic profiles. Bibliometric data were collected using Elsevier's Scopus and analyzed by Strata v14.2. Results Of 1045 faculty meeting the inclusion criteria, 653 were men and 392 were women. Men were found in greater numbers across all academic ranks, with professors as most conspicuous (79.14%), and held most (85.54%) leadership positions. The study's prediction model assessed for gender differences in academic rank and leadership roles and found that odds of men having higher h-index as 0.78 (95% confidence interval = 0.24-0.87), indicating that women were not significantly inferior in academic performance. Conclusions A significantly greater number of men make up physical medicine and rehabilitation faculty in all academic ranks and leadership positions. H-index based on gender and adjusted for covariates is comparable between men and women, suggesting that more complex, multifactorial issues are likely influencing the gender differences. © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Characterizing the Impact of Women in Academic IR: A 12-Year Analysis Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Xiao, N.
    ;
    Oliveira, D.F.M.
    ;
    Gupta, R.
    Purpose: To determine the representation of female interventional radiology (IR) investigators and elucidate possible gender-specific disparities. Materials and Methods: We analyzed 4,884 original, peer-reviewed articles from 2006–2017 in the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology and CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology. Data abstraction and statistical analysis were performed for first and senior author gender, citations, and grants. Results: We found that 84% of first authors and 91.4% of senior authors were male (P <.01). No significant difference was observed versus expected in terms of author gender collaboration combinations (P = 1.00). Each year reflected a 0.3%–0.4% increase in articles published by women (first author: B-value: 0.3, P =.05; senior author: B-value: 0.4, P =.01). No difference was observed in citations or grants received between genders. Female authors received increasing citations and grants each year (citations: first author: B-value: 0.24, P =.05; senior author: B-value: 0.16, P =.15; grants: B-value: 0.88, P =.02). Conclusions: Women are equally as productive as men as determined by metrics such as number of publications, citations, and grants and are proportionally represented in the literature. No data indicating collaborative or citation/grant discrimination were observed, suggesting that the academic IR community is inclusive of its female constituents and equally respects their research contributions. Based on the statistically significant increases in female authorship observed in this 12-year study, this article reports encouraging trends for the future of women in interventional radiology. © 2018 SIR
  • Item type:Publication,
    Are gender gaps due to evaluations of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Witteman, Holly O
    ;
    Hendricks, Michael
    ;
    Straus, Sharon
    ;
    Tannenbaum, Cara
    Background Across countries and disciplines, studies show male researchers receive more research funding than their female peers. Because most studies have been observational, it is unclear whether imbalances stem from evaluations of female research investigators or of their proposed research. In 2014, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research created a natural experiment by dividing investigator-initiated funding applications into two new grant programmes: one with and one without an explicit review focus on the calibre of the principal investigator. Methods We analysed application success among 23 918 grant applications from 7093 principal investigators in all investigator-initiated Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant programmes between 2011 and 2016. We used generalised estimating equations to account for multiple applications by the same applicant and compared differences in application success between male and female principal investigators under different review criteria. Findings Overall application success across competitions was 15·8%. After adjusting for age and research domain, the predicted probability of success in traditional programmes was 0·9 percentage points lower for female applicants than male applicants (95% CI 2·0 lower–0·2 higher; odds ratio 0·934, 95% CI 0·854–1·022). In the new programme, in which review focused on the proposed science, the gap remained 0·9 percentage points (3·2 lower–1·4 higher; 0·998, 0·794–1·229). In the new programme with an explicit review focus on the calibre of the principal investigator, the gap was 4·0 percentage points (6·7 lower–1·3 lower; 0·705, 0·519–0·960). Interpretation Gender gaps in grant funding are attributable to less favourable assessments of women as principal investigators, not of the quality of their proposed research. We discuss reasons less favourable assessments might occur and strategies to foster fair and rigorous peer review. Funding None.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The status of women cognitive scientists in Canada: Insights from publicly available NSERC funding data Open PDF 
    (OSF, 2018)
    Titone, Debra
    ;
    Tiv, Mehrgol
    ;
    Pexman, Penny M.
    A crucial question within science and academia, and cognitive science specifically, is whether there is gender disparity in opportunity and advancement over the professional lifespan (e.g., Ceci, Ginther, Kahn, & Williams, 2014; Geraci, Balsis, & Busch, 2015; Valian, 1998). To investigate this question, we analyzed gender distributions in publicly available federal funding data from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada that are specific to cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience. There were three key results. First, the proportion of women cognitive scientists progressively diminished at each career stage, particularly at the transition between graduate and postdoctoral studies. Second, female principal investigators (PI) received smaller average Discovery Grant amounts, and were less likely to receive Discovery Accelerator Supplements as a proportion of all Discovery Grants funded. Finally, at the PI level, gender differences were relatively smaller for institution-initiated grants (i.e., Canada Research Chairs) vs. investigator-initiated grants (i.e., Discovery Grants). It is our hope that presentation of such data, in concert with other recent reports for our field (e.g., Klatzky, Holt, & Behrmann, 2015; Peelle, 2016; Vaid & Geraci, 2016), continues to raise awareness that gender parity issues remain a concern that deserves ongoing attention within the field of cognitive science in Canada. Hosted on the Open Science Framework