PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Start date: 2023Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Radiology

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 13
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women in Radiology: A perspective from Spain Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2024-03)
    Cayón Somacarrera, S.
    ;
    Alonso Rodríguez, C.
    ;
    del Campo del Val, L.
    ;
    Oleaga Zufiría, L.
    ;
    Rodríguez Carnero, P.
    Abstract Introduction There are gender inequalities in all fields, including radiology. Although the situation is improving, the presence of radiologists in leadership positions continues to be a minority. The objective of this article is to analyse the situation of women in the spanish radiology, comparing it with Europe and the United States. Materials and methods We selected the years 2000-2022 as reference period to make a comparison with feminization data throughout history. In addition, relevant specific data from the just begun 2023 were also included. The variables in which we investigated feminization were the following: medical students, medical graduates, radiology residents and specialists, section chiefs, department chairs, radiology residency programme directors, radiology university professors, presidents of the main radiological entities and societies in Spain, Europe and the United States, recipients of the main awards given by these radiological societies and chief editors of their journals. In order to perform this analysis we conducted an in-depth bibliographic research, we contacted the radiological societies of Spain, Europe and the USA and we carried out a survey in the main Spanish radiology departments. Results The female presence in radiology decreases as we rise to leadership positions, a situation that is patent in Spain, Europe and the US, comparison that will be analysed in depth throughout the article. In Spanish hospitals in 2021 there were 58.1% female radiology residents, 55% female radiologists, 42.9% female section chiefs and 24.4% female department chairs. In SERAM’s history there have been 10% female presidents, 22% female gold medallists and 5% female editors-in-chief. If we analyse data from 2000 to 2023, female presidents reach 32% and female gold medallists 31%. Conclusions Although gender inequality is declining, in radiology women continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions. Work must be done in order to build a diverse and inclusive profession that reflects demographic reality. Resumen Introducción Existen desigualdades por razón de género en todos los ámbitos, incluyendo en la radiología. Aunque la situación está mejorando, la presencia de radiólogas en puestos de liderazgo continúa siendo minoritaria. El objetivo de este artículo es analizar la situación de la mujer en la radiología española, comparándola con Europa y EE.UU. Materiales y métodos Seleccionamos como franja de referencia los años 2000–2022 para hacer una comparación con datos de feminización a lo largo de la historia. Además también se incluyeron datos puntuales relevantes del recién comenzado 2023. Las variables en las que investigamos la feminización fueron las siguientes: estudiantes de medicina, médicos graduados, residentes y especialistas en radiodiagnóstico, jefes de sección, jefes de servicio, tutores de residentes de radiodiagnóstico, radiólogos profesores universitarios, presidentes de las principales entidades y sociedades radiológicas de España, Europa y EE.UU, receptores de los principales galardones de dichas sociedades radiológicas y editores jefe de sus revistas. Para ello realizamos una amplia búsqueda bibliográfica, contactamos con las sociedades radiológicas de España, Europa y EE.UU y realizamos una encuesta a los principales servicios de radiodiagnóstico de España. Resultados La presencia femenina en radiología va disminuyendo a medida que ascendemos a puestos de liderazgo, situación que se constata tanto en España como en Europa y EE.UU, comparativa que analizaremos en profundidad a lo largo del artículo. En los hospitales españoles en el año 2021 había un 58,1% de mujeres residentes de radiodiagnóstico, 55% de radiólogas, 42,9% de jefas de sección y 24,4% de jefas de servicio. En la historia de la SERAM ha habido un 10% de mujeres presidentas, un 22% de mujeres medallas de oro y un 5% de editoras jefe. Analizando los datos del año 2000 al 2023 el porcentaje de presidentas alcanza el 32% y las mujeres medallas de oro el 31%. Conclusiones Aunque la desigualdad de género está disminuyendo, en radiología las mujeres continúan estando infrarrepresentadas en puestos de liderazgo. Es preciso trabajar para crear una profesión diversa e inclusiva que refleje la realidad demográfica.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Understanding the significant underrepresentation of women in radiology Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-03)
    Peraka, Veena
    ;
    Raj, Karuna
    ;
    Champine, Julie
    ;
    Ozcan, Bersu
    ;
    Dogan, Basak
    The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the reasons for a significant underrepresentation of women in radiology. We systematically examined the gender disparity within radiology across career stages, including medical school, residency training, and faculty positions. A comprehensive literature analysis was conducted to identify the determinants influencing female medical students' and physicians' pursuit of radiology. Despite women making up approximately half of medical school graduates, their representation in radiology remains disproportionately low. Contributing factors include a scarcity of female mentors and insufficient exposure to radiology during medical training, leading to persistent misconceptions about the specialty. Additionally, female radiology faculty members encounter challenges, including gender bias and difficulty advancing in leadership positions, which contribute to professional dissatisfaction. Strategies like the formation of Women in Radiology groups and institutional initiatives have been established to increase mentorship for female trainees and progression of faculty in their careers. The underrepresentation of women is a concern that warrants attention due to the unique collaborative and empathetic dimensions that women contribute to patient care and education. Throughout their careers, women encounter numerous obstacles that affect their exposure to, involvement in, and satisfaction with the field. Addressing these barriers is crucial for enhancing the presence and influence of women in radiology.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Mind the gap: Gender disparities in authorship in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2024-12)
    Bolderston, Amanda
    ;
    McCuaig, Carly
    ;
    Ghosh, Sunita
    ;
    McEntee, Mark F.
    ;
    Kiely, Elizabeth
    Abstract Introduction Research studies tracking gender and academic publication productivity in healthcare find gender disparities in research activity, publication, and authorship. Article authorship is one of the important metrics to track when seeking to understand gender inequality in academic career advancement. Research on gender disparities in publication productivity in the field of Medical Radiation Science (MRS) is very limited thus this study analyses and explains potential gender differences in article authorship and acceptance for publication in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences (JMIRS) for a 5-year period (2017–2021). Methods Gender was inferred based on the author's first name or title (e.g., Mr, Mrs or Ms). For those who left the title blank or reported as ‘Dr’ or ‘Prof,’ a series of steps were taken to identify their gender. Where gender was impossible to ascribe, these authors were excluded. Descriptive and inferential statistics are reported for the study population. Descriptive and inferential statistics are used. Percentages of females are reported, and males constitute the other portion. Chi-square, slope analysis and z-tests were used to test hypotheses. Results Results show that female authorship overall and in all categories of authorship placement (i.e., first, last and corresponding) increased over the timeframe reviewed. The percentage gain in the increase was higher than that for male authorship. However, male authorship started from a higher baseline in 2017 and has also increased year on year and overall, as well as in each placement category examined. More female authors were in the MRS sub-specialism Radiation Therapy (RT) than in the other MRS sub-specialisms. Analysis of the acceptance rate of articles with female authors shows a weak downward trend, and this may be related to higher submission and acceptance rates of articles by male authors during the same period. Conclusion Male authors are overrepresented in all categories, which raises questions about the persistence of gender disparities in JMIRS authorship and article acceptance. Positive trends in female authorship indicate progress, yet there is the persistence of the significant under-representation of women in the Medical Radiation Sciences workforce in academic publishing. Recruiting more males to address the gender imbalance in the profession should not be at the expense of females’ career progression. RÉSUMÉ Introduction Les études de recherche portant sur le genre et la productivité des publications universitaires dans le domaine des soins de santé révèlent des disparités entre les genres en matière d'activité de recherche, de publication et de paternité d'articles. La paternité d'un article est l'une des mesures importantes à suivre lorsqu'on cherche à comprendre l'inégalité entre les genres dans l'avancement de la carrière universitaire. La recherche sur les disparités entre les genres dans la productivité des publications dans le domaine des sciences de la radiation médicale (MRS) est très limitée; cette étude analyse et explique donc les différences potentielles entre les genres dans la paternité des articles et l'acceptation pour publication dans le Journal de l'imagerie médicale et des sciences de la radiation (JIMSR) sur une période de 5 ans (2017–2021). Méthodologie Le genre a été déduit sur la base du prénom ou du titre de l'auteur (par exemple, M., Mme ou Mlle). Pour ceux qui n'ont pas indiqué de titre ou qui ont indiqué « Dr » ou « Prof », une série d'étapes ont été suivies pour identifier leur genre. Lorsqu'il était impossible d'attribuer un genre, ces auteurs ont été exclus. Des statistiques descriptives et inférentielles sont présentées pour la population étudiée. Des statistiques descriptives et inférentielles sont utilisées. Les pourcentages de femmes sont indiqués, les hommes constituant l'autre partie. Le chi carré, l'analyse de la pente et les tests z ont été utilisés pour tester les hypothèses. Résultats Les résultats montrent que le nombre d'auteurs féminins dans l'ensemble et dans toutes les catégories de positionnement (c'est-à-dire premier, dernier et correspondant) a augmenté au cours de la période examinée. Le pourcentage d'augmentation est plus élevé que pour les auteurs masculins. Toutefois, les auteurs masculins sont partis d'un niveau de référence plus élevé en 2017 et ont également augmenté d'une année sur l'autre, dans l'ensemble, ainsi que dans chaque catégorie de positionnement examinée. Les femmes auteurs étaient plus nombreuses dans la sous-spécialité radiothérapie (RT) des SRM que dans les autres sous-spécialités des SRM. L'analyse du taux d'acceptation des articles rédigés par des femmes montre une faible tendance à la baisse, qui peut être liée à des taux de soumission et d'acceptation plus élevés pour les articles rédigés par des hommes au cours de la même période. Conclusion Les auteurs masculins sont surreprésentés dans toutes les catégories, ce qui soulève des questions sur la persistance des disparités entre les genres en ce qui concerne l'autorat du JIMSR et l'acceptation des articles. Les tendances positives dans le nombre d'auteurs féminins indiquent des progrès, mais la sous-représentation significative des femmes dans la main-d'œuvre des sciences de la radiation médicale dans les publications universitaires persiste. Le recrutement d'un plus grand nombre d'hommes pour remédier au déséquilibre entre les genres dans la profession ne doit pas se faire au détriment de la progression de la carrière des femmes
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparity among top North American medical schools and their affiliated radiology departments Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-01)
    Ahmadi, Shukria
    ;
    Joarder, Ishraq
    ;
    Rotter, Lara K
    ;
    Hussain, Mehwish
    ;
    Yong-Hing, Charlotte J
    Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the degree of gender disparity in leadership positions at the top 25 medical schools in North America compared to their affiliated radiology departments. Methods The academic rank and leadership appointment of medical school and radiology faculty were obtained from publicly available official websites between June-November 2022. Gender was determined using self-identified pronouns on website biographies. Alternatively, gender API software was used. Finally, SCOPUS Elsevier was used to extract research output metrics including publication counts, citations, and h-indices. Statistical analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 25 software. Results 2216 individuals across 25 medical schools were included in this study. 1301 (58.7 %) were part of the medical school and 915 (41.3 %) were part of the affiliated radiology departments. Additionally, 1575 (71.1 %) were identified as men and 641 (28.9 %) as women. Rank biserial correlations showed a significant association between higher academic rank and male gender (rpb = 0.143, p < 0.001) regardless of affiliation (medical school leadership versus radiology faculty); this disparity was largest at the highest academic ranks. Male gender was associated with higher research productivity relative to female gender regardless of affiliation (p < 0.001). There were minimal statistical differences in leadership positions between genders, however the proportion of men holding the position of dean was two times higher than women. Conclusion The underrepresentation of women in academic medicine is prevalent in the top-ranking medical institutions in North America and disproportionately involves senior academic ranks and leadership positions.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing and improving women representation in radiology leadership positions Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-01)
    Sharma, Sonali
    ;
    Malik, Aleena
    ;
    Matschek, Jessica
    ;
    Zaki-Metias, Kaitlin M.
    ;
    Gandhi, Rushali
    Gender representation remains a critical issue in professions, especially within medical specialties like radiology, where the representation of women in leadership roles significantly lags. Despite a promising increase in women physicians in Canada, reaching 42.7% by 2019, radiology showcases a stark gender disparity, particularly in leadership positions. This article examines the barriers hindering women's advancement in radiology and proposes actionable solutions to cultivate a more equitable environment. It highlights the underrepresentation of women in radiology leadership across the United States and Canada, with women holding significantly fewer senior academic positions and leadership roles. Key barriers include a lack of women role models, gender-based obstacles in research opportunities, and by design discriminatory practices. Solutions proposed include the establishment of mentorship programs, and inclusive policies at multiple organizational levels such as at the level of trainees, faculty and leadership positions including chair of the department. Additionally, policies and initiatives centred on education and training in unconscious bias, the creation of professional groups for women in radiology, and interventions to address unsafe work environments.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender‐Based Outcomes in Grants, Prizes and Fellowship Success Rates in Clinical Radiology: A 14‐Year Review of Outcomes in Australia and New Zealand Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2025-09-24)
    Liu, Jack Edward
    ;
    Milner, Lisa
    ;
    Shaygi, Behnam
    ;
    Stewart, Michael
    ;
    Yazdabadi, Anousha
    ABSTRACT Introduction While gender disparities in the radiology workforce are well‐documented, there has been no analysis of outcomes for competitive awards in Australia and New Zealand. As formal recognition is critical for career progression, this study aimed to investigate gender‐based differences in application and success rates for grants, prizes and educational fellowships within the Australasian context. Methods We retrospectively reviewed applications for Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' (RANZCR) Faculty of Clinical Radiology grants, prizes and educational fellowships from 2011 to 2024. Application and success rates were stratified by gender and compared to College membership demographics. Significance was assessed using Fisher's exact test. Results Across 333 total applications, 227 (68.2%) were from males and 106 (31.8%) from females, closely reflecting College membership gender ratios (69.2% male vs. 30.8% female). No significant gender disparity was found in the success rates for grants (40.3% for males vs. 35.0% for females, p  = 0.58), prizes (8.8% vs. 11.1%, p  = 0.08) or educational fellowships (36.7% vs. 32.1%, p  = 0.32). Application rates for each award type also broadly reflected the gender composition of the College membership. Conclusion This study is the first to examine gender differences in clinical radiology grant, prize and educational fellowship outcomes in Australia and New Zealand. We found no significant disparities in success rates, and application rates generally mirrored College membership, suggesting the award process itself is equitable. However, the continued underrepresentation of women in radiology underscores the need to examine broader structural and sociocultural factors that may impact engagement with competitive academic opportunities.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The workplace culture, mental health and wellbeing of early- and mid-career health academics: a cross-sectional analysis Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Marck, Claudia H.
    ;
    Ayton, Darshini
    ;
    Steward, Trevor
    ;
    Koay, Hui-Fern
    ;
    Wiley, Joshua F.
    There are reports of poor working conditions for early and mid-career academics (EMCAs) in universities, however, empirical data using validated tools are scarce. We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey using validated tools to assess workplace satisfaction, exposure to workplace abuse, and mental health. Participants included employees of medical and health faculties of two of the largest Australian universities, surveyed between October 2020 and January 2021.Overall, 284 participants responded. Many reported job insecurity: half (50.7%) working on contracts with less than one remaining year. Workloads were considerable, with 89.5% of participants working overtime and 54.8% reporting burnout. Workplace abuse in the forms of bullying (46.6%), sexual harassment (25.3%), sexism (49.8%) and racism (22.5%) were commonly reported. Clinically significant symptoms of depression (28.0%), anxiety (21.7%) and suicidal ideation or self-harm (13.6%) were reported; with a higher prevalence among those working more overtime, and those exposed to workplace abuse. Priorities include providing a stable and safe workplace, increasing accountability and transparency in addressing workplace abuse, and supporting professional development.In summary, EMCAs in our study were commonly exposed to precarious employment conditions and workplace abuse. Our findings provide empirical evidence on where universities and funding bodies should direct resources and change organisational risk factors, to improve workplace culture.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing sex and gender equity in submission guidelines of radiology journals: A cross-sectional study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Khosa, F.
    ;
    Stewart, M.
    ;
    Liu, L.
    ;
    Ding, J.
    ;
    Rahmim, O.
    Purpose: Our study aimed to determine the current percentage of gender and sex equity promoting (GSEP) radiology journals, defined as satisfying at least one criterion of the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) checklist, published by the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). A secondary objective was to compare characteristics of GSEP and non-GSEP journals. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis between June 24 and July 3, 2023, was conducted. The author submission guidelines of radiology journals with a 2021 Journal Impact Factor (JIF) were assessed according to the SAGER checklist. GSEP journals were defined as satisfying one or more SAGER checklist criteria in their research instructions. Bibliometric data and journal information were collected from the Journal Citation Reports and National Library of Medicine catalogue. Results: Only 39.7 % (52) of 132 journals satisfied at least one SAGER checklist criterion. Median 2021 JIFs were higher in GSEP journals (4.62, IQR: 3.73 – 5.21) than non-GSEP journals (2.70, IQR: 2.32) (p = 0.00). Median 2021 Journal Citation Index (JCI) scores were higher in GSEP (0.64, 0.56 – 0.73) than non-GSEP journals (0.97, 0.83 – 1.10) (p = 0.00). Cited half-life was shorter for GSEP (5.40, 4.80 – 6.50) than non-GSEP journals (6.70, 5.70 – 7.40) (p = 0.05). Elsevier published 33 of 52 of GSEP journals. Conclusion: 60.3% of radiology journals with a 2021 JIF do not meet a single SAGER checklist criterion in their author submission guidelines. GSEP journals had higher impact and source metrics and a shorter cited half-life. Publishers may play a significant role in promoting endorsement of the SAGER checklist in the author submission guidelines of radiology journals. © 2024 The Author(s)
  • Item type:Publication,
    Pre- and post-COVID-19 gender trends in authorship for paediatric radiology articles worldwide: a systematic review Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Kamran, Rakhshan
    ;
    Jackman, Liam
    ;
    Chan, Cynthia
    ;
    Lee, Ann C.
    ;
    Kamran, Aleeza
    BACKGROUND: Gender inequalities in academic medicine persist despite progress over the past decade. Evidence-based targeted interventions are needed to reduce gender inequalities. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on gender trends in authorship of paediatric radiology research worldwide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospectively registered, PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2018, to May 29, 2023, with no restrictions on country of origin. Screening and data extraction occurred independently and in duplicate. Gender of first, last, and corresponding authors were determined using an artificial intelligence-powered, validated, multinational database ( www.genderize.io ). Two time periods were categorised according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering: pre-COVID (prior to March 2020) and peak and post-COVID (March 2020 onwards). One-sample binomial testing was used to analyse proportion of authorship based on gender. Categorical variables were described as frequencies and percentages, and compared using testing chi-square or Fisher exact testing, with a threshold of P<0.05 representing statistical significance. RESULTS: In total, 922 articles were included with 39 countries represented. A statistically significant difference in authorship based on gender persisted during the peak and post-COVID time period (March 2020 onwards) where women represented a statistically significant lower proportion of last (35.5%) and corresponding (42.7%) authors (P<0.001, P=0.001, respectively). Statistically significant differences for first authors were not found in either period (P=0.08 and P=0.48). CONCLUSION: This study identifies differences in gender trends for authorship in paediatric radiology research worldwide. Future efforts to increase authorship by women are needed.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Female Authorship Trends Among Articles About Artificial Intelligence in North American Radiology Journals Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Yan, T.D.
    ;
    Yuan, P.H.
    ;
    Saha, T.
    ;
    Lebel, K.
    ;
    Spalluto, L.
    Purpose: To examine trends in female authorship of peer-reviewed North American radiology articles centred around artificial intelligence (AI). Method: A bibliographic search was conducted for all AI-related articles published in four North American radiology journals. Collected data included the genders of the first and last (senior) authors, year and country. We compared the trends of female authorship using Pearson chi-square, Fisher exact tests and logistic regression models. Results: 453 articles met the inclusion criteria. Among these, 107 (22.3%) had a female first author and 97 (27.3%) had a female senior author. Female first authors were over three times more likely to publish with a female senior author. Among the four journals, the CARJ had the highest proportion of female senior authors at 45.5%. The only significant temporal trend identified was an increase over the years in female senior authors in Radiology. Twenty-four countries contributed to the included articles, with the largest contributors being the United States (n = 290) and Canada (n = 30). Of the countries contributing more than 15 articles, there were none with above 50% female authorship. Conclusions: Female authors are underrepresented in AI-related radiology literature. However, there has been an encouraging recent increase in female authorship in AI-related radiology articles trending towards significance. There is a great opportunity to improve female representation in AI with intentional mentorship and recruitment. We urge more platforms for female voices in radiology as AI becomes increasingly integrated into the radiology community. © The Author(s) 2022.