PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Filters

Settings

Start date: 2000Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.UK

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 38
  • Item type:Publication,
    More than a decade with ‘gender on the agenda’: have we made progress? Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-04)
    Colvin, Lesley
    ;
    Kemp, Harriet
    As female clinical academics and members of the British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA), we recognise the importance of gender equity, which remains an issue in academic medicine, despite the increase in the proportion of women in medical schools throughout the world. This inequity is most apparent at senior leadership levels, with the number of female professors in anaesthesia remaining in single digits in the UK, and at about 25% of full professors in the USA. A strong publication record is an important promotion metric in academia. In a 2013 analysis, only 39% of first and senior authors published in the BJA were women, whereas in our recent analysis, this proportion improved to 54%. The benefits of having increased representation of women as leaders are unequivocal, requiring active strategies to accelerate any progress that has been made. Initiatives such as the current BJA Special Issue on Women in Anaesthesia Research are key elements in this process.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Barriers and facilitators to engaging with academia: a Black dental student perspective – pilot study Open PDF 
    (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-11-21)
    Ranauta, Amitha
    ;
    Onwudiwe, Favour
    ;
    Kadiyo, Tanaka Anthony Jeremy
    ;
    Ukoha, Obioma Mofiyinfoluwa
    ;
    Ogunleye, Rachel Adebukola Anuoluwa
    Abstract Introduction This pilot study investigates barriers and facilitators to Black dental students' engagement with academic careers in dentistry, focusing on underrepresentation in academia despite efforts to diversify the workforce. Methods and results Through qualitative analysis of focus group discussions with Black dental students from two UK dental schools, several key themes emerged. Participants highlighted the importance of active patronage in addressing underrepresentation, advocating for proactive support systems beyond mere mentoring. They also emphasised the significance of various forms of capital – economic, cultural, and social – in shaping career trajectories and success in academia. Intersectionality, encompassing experiences of sexism, racism, and classism, emerged as a significant barrier, particularly affecting Black female students. Cultural specificity and individualism versus collectivism were also explored, revealing how cultural influences shape career choices and perceptions of academia. Conclusion The study underscores the need for greater cultural competence and understanding among stakeholders to reduce barriers and promote inclusivity. While the study offers valuable insights, its limitations, such as sampling bias and cultural homogeneity among participants, should be acknowledged. Nevertheless, the findings call for concerted efforts from universities, policymakers, and research institutions to provide explicit support, foster inclusive environments, and promote diversity in dental academia. By addressing these challenges, academia can better reflect the populations it serves and ensure equitable opportunities for all aspiring dental professionals.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science: An exploratory study of women's and men's perceptions Open PDF 
    (BioMed Central Ltd., 2017)
    Ovseiko, P.V.
    ;
    Chapple, A.
    ;
    Edmunds, L.D.
    ;
    Ziebland, S.
    Background: While in the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Australia, higher education and research institutions are widely engaged with the Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science to advance gender equality, empirical research on this process and its impact is rare. This study combined two data sets (free- text comments from a survey and qualitative interviews) to explore the range of experiences and perceptions of participation in Athena SWAN in medical science departments of a research-intensive university in Oxford, United Kingdom. Methods: The study is based on the secondary analysis of data from two projects: 59 respondents to an anonymous online survey (42 women, 17 men) provided relevant free-text comments and, separately, 37 women participated in face-to-face narrative interviews. Free-text survey comments and narrative interviews were analysed thematically using constant comparison. Results: Both women and men said that participation in Athena SWAN had brought about important structural and cultural changes, including increased support for women's careers, greater appreciation of caring responsibilities, and efforts to challenge discrimination and bias. Many said that these positive changes would not have happened without linkage of Athena SWAN to government research funding, while others thought there were unintended consequences. Concerns about the programme design and implementation included a perception that Athena SWAN has limited ability to address longstanding and entrenched power and pay imbalances, persisting lack of work-life balance in academic medicine, questions about the sustainability of positive changes, belief that achieving the award could become an end in itself, resentment about perceived positive discrimination, and perceptions that further structural and cultural changes were needed in the university and wider society. Conclusions: The findings from this study suggest that Athena SWAN has a positive impact in advancing gender equality, but there may be limits to how much it can improve gender equality without wider institutional and societal changes. To address the fundamental causes of gender inequality would require cultural change and welfare state policies incentivising men to increase their participation in unpaid work in the family, which is beyond the scope of higher education and research policy. © 2017 The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex Disparities in Authorship Order of Cardiology Scientific Publications Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Ouyang, David
    ;
    Sing, David
    ;
    Shah, Sonia
    ;
    Hu, Jiaqi
    ;
    Duvernoy, Claire
    BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the representation of women in medical training, women continue to be underrepresented in cardiology, academic medicine, and more specifically, in senior positions within academic medicine. Identifying disparities in research productivity and acknowledgment can highlight barriers to female representation in academic cardiology leadership, as well as in academic promotion. METHODS AND RESULTS: This bibliometric analysis included all authors of original research articles between 1980 and 2017 from 3 high-impact cardiology journals ( Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, and European Heart Journal). We identified 71 345 unique authors of 55 085 primary research articles during our study period. Female authors accounted for 33.1% of all authors; however, they represented only 26.7% of first authors and 19.7% of senior authors. Looking at the most prolific authors within this time period, female authors were not well represented, accounting for only 5% of the top 100 authors. Articles with a female senior author had more female middle authors than articles with a male senior author (mean 1.41 versus 0.97, P<0.001) and were more likely to have a female first author (0.37 versus 0.18, P<0.001). There was an increased representation of female authors as first and senior authors compared with the total number of articles with female authors over time ( P<0.001 for trend); however, female senior authorship rates continued to lag first authorship rates. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large database of published manuscripts, we found that female representation in published cardiology research has increased over the past 4 decades. However, women continue to be not well represented as first authors, senior authors, and in the number of publications. When women were senior authors, they published more articles with female first authors and had more female authors. In addition to recruiting more women into the field of cardiology, additional work is needed to identify and address barriers to academic advancement for female physician-scientists.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing the gender gap in musculoskeletal radiology authorship across three continents: are really the “ladies first”? Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Nischal, N.
    ;
    Iyengar, K. P.
    ;
    Vaishya, R.
    ;
    Haleem, S.
    ;
    Zaw pe, E.
    AIM To assess gender-specific authorship trends in musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology in three major radiology journals, Skeletal Radiology (SR), Clinical Radiology (CR) and Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging (IJRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective analysis of articles pertaining to MSK radiology was done for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 for SR and CR and for the years 2010 and 2020 for IJRI. The number and positions of female authors was noted. RESULTS Three hundred and twenty-five articles were reviewed after excluding the articles where the gender of one or more authors could not be conclusively determined. In SR, the percentage of female authors increased significantly from 4% in 2000 to 17% in 2010 (p<0.0001) and to 21.9% in 2020 (p<0.0001) with an increase in the percentage of first female authors from 0.8% in 2000 to 4.9% in 2010 and further to 5.4% in 2020. In CR, the percentage of female authors reduced from 13.8% in 2000 to 13.6% in 2010 (p=0.9798 and further reduced to 7% in 2020 (p=0.1592). In IJRI, the percentage of articles with no female authors went down from 36.4% (2010) to 26.7% (2020). CONCLUSION There is an upward trend in female authorship in MSK radiology related articles in SR and IJRI with continued under-representation in CR. The first and middle order female authors have shown a significant increase, although the number of last female authors remains very low. Analysis of such trends in academic journals from other subspecialities in medicine needs to be undertaken to confirm or refute the findings of this study.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Being a female academic under neoliberal evaluation: A systematic review
    (2021)
    Mula-Flacón, J.
    ;
    Cruz-González, C.
    ;
    Segovia, J.D.
    ;
    Rodríguez, C.L.
    The current academic assessment system is drawing a scenario based on neoliberal values. It has contributed to the perpetuation of gender inequalities. This systematic literature review aims to synthesize the most relevant research on the impact of neoliberalism on the professional identity of female academics. For this purpose, a systematized bibliographic search was carried out in four different databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Education Resources Information Center, and Google Scholar), which yielded a total of 26 articles published in international journals. The results illustrate a research field dominated by the USA and the UK and a trajectory of growth in the literature in recent years. The emerging themes reveal some of the challenges faced by women academics in a neoliberal context. These obstacles may be external and even unconsciously imposed by women academics themselves. Motherhood emerges as one of the most influential aspects of their professional development. Furthermore, our findings explore various ways in which women academics reconstruct their identity in the face of systemic challenges. This manuscript culminates with a discussion of the impact that neoliberal values and their general consequences in the performance evaluation processes of academics have on women. Therefore, we provide a number of implications for professional practice and future lines of research. © 2021 The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Misra, Vaidehi
    ;
    Safi, Frozan
    ;
    Brewerton, Kathryn A.
    ;
    Wu, Wei
    ;
    Mason, Robin
    OBJECTIVES: Evaluate gender differences in authorship of COVID-19 articles in high-impact medical journals compared with other topics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional review. DATA SOURCES: Medline database. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles published from 1 January to 31 December 2020 in the seven leading general medical journals by impact factor. Article types included primary research, reviews, editorials and commentaries. DATA EXTRACTION: Key data elements were whether the study topic was related to COVID-19 and names of the principal and the senior authors. A hierarchical approach was used to determine the likely gender of authors. Logistic regression assessed the association of study characteristics, including COVID-19 status, with authors' likely gender; this was quantified using adjusted ORs (aORs). RESULTS: We included 2252 articles, of which 748 (33.2%) were COVID-19-related and 1504 (66.8%) covered other topics. A likely gender was determined for 2138 (94.9%) principal authors and 1890 (83.9%) senior authors. Men were significantly more likely to be both principal (1364 men; 63.8%) and senior (1332 men; 70.5%) authors. COVID-19-related articles were not associated with the odds of men being principal (aOR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; p=0.89) or senior authors (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; p=0.71) relative to other topics. Articles with men as senior authors were more likely to have men as principal authors (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.83; p<0.001). Men were more likely to author articles reporting original research and those with corresponding authors based outside the USA and Europe. CONCLUSIONS: Women were substantially under-represented as authors among articles in leading medical journals; this was not significantly different for COVID-19-related articles. Study limitations include potential for misclassification bias due to the name-based analysis. Results suggest that barriers to women's authorship in high-impact journals during COVID-19 are not significantly larger than barriers that preceded the pandemic and that are likely to continue beyond it. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020186702.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The influence of first author sex on acceptance rates of submissions to Anaesthesia Cases. Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Laycock, H.
    ;
    Bailey, C. R.
    More than 50% of medical students and 45% of practising doctors are female in the UK. In the specialty of anaesthesia, 32% of consultants are female. However, compared with males, females are under-represented as authors of articles published in high-impact journals. We investigated the proportion of female first authors by examining the case reports submitted to Anaesthesia Cases since its inception in 2013. We defined authors by their sex (male or female), that is, biological characteristics, rather than their gender. There were a total of 802 submissions to Anaesthesia Cases over 4.5 years. Sixteen submissions were excluded and of the remaining 786 submissions, 279 were accepted and 507 rejected, an acceptance rate of 35.5%. Twenty (2.5%) authors' sex could not be identified. The overall proportion of female first authors was 37.1%. The proportion of female first authors of accepted case reports was 42.1% and females were first authors of rejected case reports in 34.4%. We found that, compared with previous studies on female sex and gender bias in publishing, there was a relatively high proportion of female first authors publishing in Anaesthesia Cases and female first authors were more likely to be accepted than male first authors. Authorship is considered to reflect career success and there continues to be sex/gender inequity that must be tackled at all levels, from application to medical school, through research funding, journals and Editorial Boards.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender inequalities and academic journal publishing: The view from the journal of american studies
    (Cambridge University Press, 2021)
    Jameela, M.
    ;
    Moynihan, S.
    ;
    Witham, N.I.C.K.
    This virtual special issue is the outcome of a project entitled Women and JAS, which was launched by the coeditors of the Journal of American Studies in October 2019 to document the involvement of women in the journal's day-to-day business from its inception in 1956 as the Bulletin of the British Association for American Studies. The project arises out of – and will hopefully contribute to – larger conversations about the progression of women scholars in academia. While the UK and US higher-education contexts (the contexts most pertinent to this discussion) differ, there are notable similarities in terms of the relationship between gender and career advancement. Both witness attrition of women from academia as they progress from undergraduate studies to PhD and beyond; both see disproportionate numbers of women scholars employed in precarious, part-time and/or teaching-only roles; both see a very low proportion of women in senior professorial roles; fewer women in both locations apply for (and are, therefore, awarded) major grants. In the UK, specifically, recent conversations around gender inequality in higher education have revolved around issues (and initiatives) such as the gender pay gap, Athena SWAN, sexual harassment and the effects of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), caring responsibilities and affective labour.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Trends in Authorship in Psychiatry Journals From 2008 to 2018 Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Hart, Kamber L.
    ;
    Frangou, Sophia
    ;
    Perlis, Roy H.
    BACKGROUND: Women are currently underrepresented in academic psychiatry. As publication activity reflects both leadership and participation in academia, we examined temporal trends in women's authorship by conducting a large-scale bibliometric study of psychiatry journals. METHODS: We examined changes in proportions of women in the first, last, and overall authorship positions over time; relationship to journal impact factor and editorial board makeup; and rates of transition to senior author status using original research articles published in the 24 highest-impact psychiatry journals between January 2008 and May 2018. RESULTS: In 30,934 articles, women represented 40.0% of all authors in 2008 and 44.8% in 2018, with a significant increase in the percentage of women as first authors (2008: 43.5%, 2018: 49.5%; B = 0.64, p = .002) and last authors over time (2008: 30.0%, 2018: 35.7%; B = 0.64, p = 1 × 10-5). Articles with women as last authors were significantly more likely than those with men as last authors to have a woman as first author (χ21 = 126.1, p < 2.2 × 10-16). Women exhibited slower rates of transition to the last author position (log rank p = 2 × 10-16); time to 10% transition was 5 years for men and 9 years for women. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate continued improvement in the representation of women authors in psychiatry journals, resulting in near parity in first authors. However, slower rates of transition to the senior author position and continued underrepresentation of women as senior authors suggest ongoing challenges in achieving gender parity in academic leadership. At the present rate of change for last authors (0.64% increase per year), women would achieve parity in senior authorship in ∼20 to 25 years.