PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11

Diferencias de género en Anestesiología. ¿En qué punto nos encontramos en España? Resultados de una encuesta nacional Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2020-08)
Aliaño, M.
;
Franco, G.
;
Gilsanz, F.
Resumen Objetivo En la última década se han publicado numerosos trabajos en los que se pone de manifiesto la persistencia de diferencias de género en medicina. La finalidad de este estudio fue investigar si este problema existe en la especialidad de Anestesiología en España. Métodos El estudio se llevó a cabo mediante una encuesta anónima que se distribuyó entre los especialistas en Anestesiología. El cuestionario estaba formado por 39 preguntas diseñadas para investigar la situación profesional, laboral y personal, así como las percepciones individuales en relación con la discriminación de género en el trabajo. Resultados Se incluyeron 1.619 encuestas, lo que representa el 17,6% del total de anestesiólogos de España; 654 participantes fueron hombres (40,4%) y 965 mujeres (59,6%). Las mayores diferencias fueron observadas en las siguientes áreas: el 70,0% de participantes informaron de que su jefe de servicio es un hombre. En relación con los puestos de liderazgo, el 25,2% de las mujeres que respondieron a la encuesta habían desempeñado algún puesto de confianza frente al 46,1% de los hombres (p < 0,001). En cuanto a la posición académica, el 10,3% de los hombres respondieron ser profesores de universidad en contraste con el 4,8% de mujeres (p < 0,001). El 46,0% de las mujeres que participaron en la encuesta piensan que existe discriminación de género en su profesión, mientras que solo el 12,6% de los hombres lo reconocieron. Un tercio de las mujeres (36,6%) consideran su condición de género una barrera para promocionar y tienen miedo de perder su trabajo por quedarse embarazadas. Además, tanto hombres como mujeres han presenciado un trato diferente por parte de pacientes y personal sanitario hacia sus compañeras anestesiólogas. Conclusión Los resultados de esta encuesta demuestran que existe una brecha de género en Anestesiología en España. En concreto, las mujeres están poco representadas en puestos académicos y de liderazgo, y un porcentaje considerable de encuestados perciben diferencias de género en el trabajo. Este estudio puede servir para monitorizar futuros cambios en nuestro país y como ejemplo para investigaciones en otros países vecinos. Abstract Objective Publications of diverse medical specialties confirm that gender differences still exist in the medical field. This particular study aims to investigate whether this problem exists in the specialty of Anaesthesiology in Spain. Methods An anonymous survey was distributed among anaesthesiologists in Spain. It had 39 questions and was designed to investigate professional position, work conditions, personal situation, and individual perceptions. The goal was to target the majority of anaesthesiologists working in Spain. Results Completed surveys were received from 1,619 respondents which represents 17.6% of the total number of anaesthesiologists in Spain; 654 respondents were male (40.4%) and 965 were female (59.6%). The greater differences were found in the following areas: 70.0% of the respondents advised that their head of department is male. When asked about management and leadership positions, 25.2% of female respondents had ever had any management role in contrast to 46.1% of men (p < 0.001). Regarding academic positions, 10.3% of male respondents are university professors in contrast to only 4.8% of women (p < 0.001). 46.0% of the women surveyed believe that gender discrimination exists in the workplace whereas only 12.6% of men reported the same. A third of women (36.6%) consider their gender a barrier to promotion and fear losing their job due to pregnancy. Furthermore, both genders have witnessed patients and colleagues treating staff differently according to gender. Conclusion The results of the survey show the existence of a gender gap among Spanish anaesthesiologists. Of particular note, women are under-represented in academic and leadership positions. Additionally, a considerable percentage of respondents perceive gender-based discrimination to be active in their workplaces. This study could serve as a template for future research in other neighbouring countries and as a means to monitor any changes in coming years.
Trends in Authorship in Anesthesiology Journals Open PDF
(2019)
Miller, Joanna
;
Chuba, Emuejevoke
;
Deiner, Stacie
;
DeMaria, Samuel
;
Katz, Daniel
Despite increasing representation in medicine, women continue to be a minority in academic practice and leadership, especially in male-dominated fields like anesthesiology. Differences in compensation and participation in leadership may represent barriers to career advancement for women in anesthesiology. Key factors for promotion in academic anesthesiology are research, funding, and publication. As such, designation as a first or senior author on a publication in a professional journal may act as currency for promotion. Here, we examine the prevalence of female first and senior authorship of original research articles published in Anesthesiology and Anesthesia & Analgesia during the years 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017. Other manuscript characteristics assessed in relation to author gender included study type, subspecialty topic, and total number of authors. Of 2600 manuscripts studied, analysis of authorship by year demonstrated an increase in female first authorship, senior authorship, and editorial board membership by 10%, 9%, and 6%, respectively. Women made up a higher percentage of first authors on manuscripts with female senior authors. More nonexperimental studies had female senior authors than experimental studies. Female first authors had greater representation in the subspecialties of neuroanesthesia, obstetrical anesthesia, pain management, and pediatric anesthesia. Median number of authors was unrelated to senior author gender. This study shows increasing female first and senior authorship, as well as editorial board composition in 2 popular, high-impact anesthesiology journals. Recognizing gender-based trends in publications is important to develop strategies for the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in anesthesiology.
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.
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, Ronnie
OBJECTIVE: 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.
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.
Sex Differences in Academic Productivity Across Academic Ranks and Specialties in Academic Medicine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Open PDF
(2021)
Ha, Giang L.
;
Lehrer, Eric J.
;
Wang, Ming
;
Holliday, Emma
;
Jagsi, Reshma
Importance: Despite equal numbers of men and women entering medical school, women are underrepresented in the upper echelons of academic medicine and receive less compensation and research funding. Citation-related publication productivity metrics, such as the h-index, are increasingly used for hiring, salary, grants, retention, promotion, and tenure decisions. Exploring sex differences in these metrics across academic medicine provides deeper insight into why differences are observed in career outcomes. Objective: To systematically examine the available literature on sex differences in h-index of academic faculty physicians across all medical specialties and all levels of academic rank. Data Sources: Medical literature with the term h-index found in PubMed and published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018, was used. Study Selection: A PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes), PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses), and MOOSE (Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) selection protocol was used to find observational studies that published h-indexes for faculty physicians that were stratified by sex. Studies were excluded if they were review articles, retracted, or unavailable online. Ultimately, 14 of 786 studies (1.78%) met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data from 9 studies across 16 specialties were examined using weighted random-effects meta-analyses. Five studies were excluded because of overlapping specialties with another study or because they were missing appropriate statistics for the meta-analysis. Four of these studies were included in qualitative synthesis to bring the total to 13 studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcome was the h-index. Results: The meta-analysis included 10 665 North American unique academic physicians across 9 different studies from the years 2009 to 2018. Of the 10 665 physicians, 2655 (24.89%) were women. Summary effect sizes for mean h-indexes of men and women and mean h-index difference between men and women were determined for all faculty physicians and at each academic rank. Overall, female faculty had lower h-indexes than male faculty (mean difference, -4.09; 95% CI, -5.44 to -2.73; P < .001). When adjusting for academic rank, female faculty still had lower h-indexes than male faculty at the ranks of assistant professor (mean difference, -1.3; 95% CI, -1.90 to -0.72; P < .001), associate professor (mean difference, -2.09; 95% CI, -3.40 to -0.78; P = .002), and professor (mean difference, -3.41; 95% CI, -6.24 to -0.58; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, women had lower h-indexes than men across most specialties and at all academic ranks, but it is unclear why these differences exist. These findings suggest that future investigation should be conducted regarding the causes of lower h-indexes in women and that interventions should be developed to provide a more equitable environment for all physicians regardless of sex.
Women Representation as First and Corresponding Authors in Neuroanesthesiology and Neurocritical Care Journals: A Retrospective Analysis Open PDF
(2021)
Gupta, Nidhi
;
Banerjee, Shraya
;
Choudhury, Kalyanpury J.
;
Prabhakar, Hemanshu
INTRODUCTION: There is limited literature on the representation of women in leading roles in neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care academia. We aimed to determine the representation of women as first and corresponding authors in articles published in 3 dedicated journals of neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care during last 5 years. METHODS: Articles published in the Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology, Neurocritical Care, and Journal of Neuroanaesthesiology and Critical Care between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2020 were included in this study. The primary outcome was the proportion of women first authors, and secondary outcomes were the percentage of women corresponding authors, and representation of women as first and corresponding author by article type and country of affiliation. RESULTS: Of the 1164 articles included in the study, 403 (34.6%) had a woman first author. Women first authorship was highest for Special Articles (5/11; 45.5%), Clinical Reports (44/113; 38.9%) and Narrative Review Articles (58/151; 38.4%) and lowest for Original Research Articles (198/597; 33.2%). Women accounted for 29.6% (344/1164) of corresponding authors across all article types. Overall, the United States and India had the highest representation of women first authors (159/403; 39.0% and 107/344; 31.0%, respectively), and India also had highest proportion of women corresponding authors (107/272; 39.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Women were underrepresented compared with men as first author of articles published in 3 dedicated neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care journals over the last 5 years. Women had the lowest representation as authors of Original Research Articles.
Gender Differences in Authorship and Quality of Anesthesia Clinical Practice Guidelines From 2016 to 2020 Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument Open PDF
(2024)
Rong, Lisa Q.
;
Martinez, Andrew P.
;
Rahouma, Mohamed
;
Lopes, Alexandra J.
;
Lee, Jerry Y.
INTRODUCTION: Women continue to be underrepresented in academic anesthesiology. This study assessed guidelines in anesthesia journals over the past 5 years, evaluating differences in woman-led versus man-led guidelines in terms of author gender, quality, and changes over time. We hypothesized that anesthesia guidelines would be predominately man-led, and that there would be differences in quality between woman-led versus man-led guidelines. METHODS: All clinical practice guidelines published in the top 10 anesthesia journals were identified as per Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor between 2016 and 2020. Fifty-one guidelines were included for author, gender, and quality analysis using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Each guideline was assessed across 6 domains and 23 items and given an overall score, overall quality score, and overall rating/recommendation. Stratified and trend analyses were performed for woman-led versus man-led guidelines. RESULTS: Fifty out of 51 guidelines were included: 1 was excluded due to unidentifiable first-author gender. In total, 255 of 1052 (24%) authors were women, and woman-led guidelines (woman-first author) represented 12 of 50 (24%) overall guidelines. Eighteen percent (9 of 50) of guidelines had all-male authors, and a majority (26 of 50, 52%) had less than one-third of female authors. The overall number and percentage of woman-led guidelines did not change over time. There was a significantly higher percentage of female authors in woman-led versus man-led guidelines, median 39% vs 20% ( P = .012), as well as a significantly higher number of female coauthors in guidelines that were woman-led median 3.5 vs 1.0, P = .049. For quality, there was no significant difference in the overall rating or objective quality of woman- versus man-led guidelines. However, there was a significant increase in the overall rating of all the guidelines over time ( P = .010), driven by the increase in overall rating among man-led guidelines, P = .002. The overall score of guidelines did not increase over time; however, they increased in man-led but not woman-led guidelines. There was no significant correlation between the percentage of female authors per guideline and either overall score or overall rating. CONCLUSIONS: There is a substantial disparity in the number of women leading and contributing to guidelines which has not improved over time. Woman-led guidelines included more women and a higher percentage of women. There was no difference in quality of guidelines by first-author gender or percentage of female authors. Further systematic and quota-driven sponsorship is needed to promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion in anesthesia guidelines.
Gender Differences in Authorship in the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia: A 28-Year Analysis of Publications Originating From the United States, 1990-2017 Open PDF
(2019)
Pagel, Paul S.
;
Freed, Julie K.
;
Lien, Cynthia A.
OBJECTIVE: Gender-based differences in scholarship among cardiothoracic anesthesiologists have not been studied. The authors examined the gender distribution of authorship of original research articles, case reports, review articles, and editorials in the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (JCVA) originating from the United States during four 3-year intervals to determine temporal changes in productivity of women in cardiothoracic anesthesiology. The authors tested the hypothesis that scholarly output of women has increased progressively in JCVA over time concomitant with greater participation in first, last, and corresponding author roles. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Internet analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Authors of research articles, case reports, review articles, and editorials published in JCVA in 1990-92, 1999-2001, 2008-10, and 2015-17. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The gender of each author was determined by inspection of the first name. If gender could not be established easily, the author's institutional website was examined or an internet search using the Google search engine was conducted. First, last, and corresponding authors as well as coauthors were noted for each article. A total of 1,195 publications with 4,982 authors (1,032 women; 20.7%) were examined. Gender was identified positively in 98.5% of authors. Women were first, last, and corresponding authors on 22.4%, 10.3%, and 14.6% of publications, respectively. The percentage of women who were authors increased from 12.1% in 1990-92 to 20.9% in 1999-2001 (p < 0.05), but plateaued in 2008 to 2010 (22.3%) and 2015 to 2017 (22.9%). Greater percentages of women were first authors (26.2%), senior authors (11.8%), and corresponding authors (16.6%) in 2015 to 2017 compared with 1990 to 1992 (9.6%, 7.0%, and 8.7%, respectively; p < 0.05 for each). The contributions of women to research articles and case reports were primarily responsible for these observed increases, although women also made a substantial impact with review articles in 2015 to 2017. The percentage of publications that included at least 1 female author in any capacity increased in a time-dependent manner (p < 0.05) from 31.0% (1990-1992) to 74.4% (2015-2017). The proportion of female first or last authors (35.0%) appearing in JCVA during 2015 to 2017 was modestly higher than the current percentage of female cardiothoracic anesthesiologists practicing in departments with accredited fellowship programs (29.1%). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that scholarly output of women rose in JCVA over time, but gains in productivity have plateaued more recently. These findings are encouraging, but women continue to be underrepresented in corresponding and last author roles.
Gender Composition and Trends of Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia Editorial Board Membership: A 33-Year Analysis, 1987-2019 Open PDF
(2019)
Pagel, Paul S.
;
Freed, Julie K.
;
Lien, Cynthia A.
OBJECTIVE: Gender disparities in editorial board composition exist in the vast majority of specialties including anesthesiology. If a similar lack of gender parity exists in cardiothoracic anesthesiology is unknown. The authors examined the gender composition and trends of the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (JCVA) editorial board from the initial year of its publication (1987) to 2019. The authors tested the hypothesis that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history, but women are underrepresented compared with the percentage of those currently practicing academic cardiothoracic anesthesia in the United States (US). DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Internet analysis. PARTICIPANTS: All members of the JCVA editorial board, 1987-2019. INTERVENTIONS: The JCVA editor-in-chief, the associate editor-in-chief, associate editors, section editors, and general editors on the board were extracted from the masthead of a single issue from each calendar year. The years were divided into quartiles (1987-1995, 1996-2003, 2004-2011, and 2012-2019) to collect representative samples of editorial board composition for analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 2,797 members of the JCVA editorial board were positively identified (2,477 [88.6%] men; 310 [11.1%] women); 10 (0.3%) editors could not be identified. Four hundred and fourteen associate and section editors were recorded (men 360 [87.0%], women 54 [13.0%]). There were also 2,353 general editors (2,087 [88.7%] men; 256 [10.9%] women). The total number of JCVA board members, associate and section editors, and general editors progressively increased from 1987 to 1995 to 2012 to 2019. The percentage of women serving on the editorial board increased from 2.5% to 15.8%. Increases in the proportion of female general editors from 2.9% to 16.2% were responsible for this overall increase. A gender gap between the percentage of female first authors (data obtained from a previous publication) and editorial board members was observed in each quartile. Editorial board composition was also different than last author distribution in 1987 to 1995 and 2012 to 2019, but not the other 2 time periods. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history. Nevertheless, women continue to be underrepresented on the JCVA board compared with the percentage of US female academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists, and gender gaps between first and last authorship and board composition also persist.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results