PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Gender Differences in National Institutes of Health Funding for Family Medicine Faculty Open PDF(American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), 2026-01) ;Qazi, Shurjeel Uddin ;Cawse-Lucas, Jeanne ;Hussain, Mehwish ;Khurshid, KiranKhosa, FaisalINTRODUCTION: The present study investigated the current trends of gender disparity in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding patterns for research within Family Medicine. METHODS: Funding data was collected from the online NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditure and Results (RePORTER) system for fiscal years 2017-2020, and information regarding each Principal Investigator (PI) was retrieved from the Scopus database and departmental websites. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis tests were performed on collected data for statistical comparison of continuous variables. RESULTS: We analyzed 730 grants in our analysis. Amongst them, 398 (54.5%) were awarded to women PIs and 332 (45.5%) to men PIs. The mean NIH grant amount awarded to men PIs (518,862±490,793.32) was significantly higher than the mean grant amount awarded to women PIs (450,195±428,405.62) (p = 0.04). The strongest correlation between NIH funding and academic output was observed for the number of publications of men PIs. When the gender of PI and co-PI were analyzed together, there was no significant difference in the number of grants or mean grant amount. Stratification by academic degree revealed no significant difference between both genders for the mean NIH grant amount. CONCLUSION: Despite the increasing representation of women within the discipline of family medicine, men continue to receive higher average NIH grant amounts compared to women. The differences are multifactorial and may include differences in academic productivity or grant committees' heuristics. Overall, the results were promising with little evidence of significant gender disequilibrium within NIH-funding for researchers in FM.Item type:Publication, Understanding professional disparities in academic anesthesiology: a single-center gender-based survey study Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-12-07) ;Donovan, Anne L. ;Chang, Joyce ;Sinskey, JinaSchwartz, RachelBackground Women in academic anesthesiology face numerous structural and cultural barriers that impede academic advancement and threaten career longevity. Understanding the impact of these challenges can allow steps to be taken to improve gender equity and retention in academic anesthesiology. Methods This study describes a voluntary, anonymous survey distributed to faculty members in the Department of Anesthesia & Perioperative Care at an urban tertiary care academic Health System with a variety of anesthetizing locations across six hospitals. All clinical faculty members in the Department, regardless of gender identity, were invited to participate ( n = 209). The 57-question survey, which was administered over a 3-week time period in 2024, examined the relationship between demographic variables and professional factors relating to career progression. Quantitative data were summarized with descriptive statistics to compare responses between both gender and career stage peer groups. Using inductive thematic analysis, the authors analyzed open-ended survey data and developed themes that will be used to develop future improvement initiatives. Results The survey response rate was 35% (73/209). Respondents were well-balanced in terms of gender (52.1% women, 45.2% men, 2.7% other) and other demographic groups. Women respondents more often remained at an assistant professor level after 6–10 years of practice (36.4% vs. 0%), reported fewer first or senior author publications if in practice 5 + years (70% vs. 33.3%), and described non-promotable work responsibilities in early- and mid-career time points (85% vs. 67%). Women less often reported receiving an accelerated promotion (33.3% vs. 44.8%); holding departmental (50% vs. 58.6%), institutional (17.9% vs. 35.7%), or national (34.6% vs. 44.8%) leadership positions; and having participated on an editorial board (26.5% vs. 37.9%). More women, particularly in early- and mid-career stages, reported active intent to leave the institution (21.1% vs. 12.1%). Three clear themes emerged from qualitative survey data: 1) Career Advancement, 2) Work Culture, and 3) Work-life Integration. Conclusions Differences are reported in traditional metrics of academic career success between men and women in an academic anesthesiology department. The themes identified provide concrete targets for improvement in improving equity between women and men and retention in academic anesthesiology.Item type:Publication, Women Underrepresentation in R&I: A Sector Program Assessment of the Contribution of Gender Equality Policies in Research and Innovation. Open PDF(2020) ;Striebing, Clemens ;Kalpazidou Schmidt, Evanthia ;Palmén, Rachel ;Holzinger, FlorianNagy, BeataDespite decades of efforts to achieve gender equality in research and innovation (R&I), all EU member states still face remarkable difficulties in driving forward the development of their innovation system while at the same time improving gender equality by using all the available research potential. In this paper we focus on the development of the share of women researchers in four national innovation systems, i.e. in Austria, Denmark, Hungary and Spain in the time period 2005-2015. The four selected cases represent countries with significant differences in their innovation capacity, gender regimes and progress of gender equality in R&I. A qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is carried out to conduct a sector program evaluation based on statistical data and qualitative studies to understand the dynamic development of the proportion of women researchers. The study aims to provide insights into the aggregated gender equality interventions and policies implemented in the four countries studied and their contributions to the development of the proportion of women scientists at the structural level. The analysis reveals that the development of the share of women researchers during the studied period has been particularly influenced by contextual factors, namely the relative size of the business enterprise sector and the share of women among holders of tertiary education. While this is the case, it is found that gender equality interventions need to be more widespread and more effectively designed to be a strong contributing factor to an increasing representation of women in R&I.Item type:Publication, A quasi-experimental study of ethnic and gender bias in university grading Open PDF(Public Library of Science, 2021) ;Bischoff, C.S. ;Ejrnæs, A.Rubin, O.This paper contributes to the debate on race- and gender-based discrimination in grading. We apply a quasi-experimental research design exploiting a shift from open grading in 2018 (examinee’s name clearly visible on written assignments), to blind grading in 2019 (only student ID number visible). The analysis thus informs name-based stereotyping and discrimination, where student ethnicity and gender are derived from their names on written assignments. The case is a quantitative methods exam at Roskilde University (Denmark). We rely on OLS regression models with interaction terms to analyze whether blind grading has any impact on the relative grading differences between the sexes (female vs. male examinees) and/or between the two core ethnic groups (ethnic minorities vs. ethnic majority examinees). The results show no evidence of gender or ethnic bias based on names in the grading process. The results were validated by several checks for robustness. We argue that the weaker evidence of ethnic discrimination in grading vis-à-vis discrimination in employment and housing suggests the relevance of gauging the stakes involved in potentially discriminatory activities. Copyright: © 2021 Bischoff et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.