PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, [Glass ceiling and gender inequalities in the careers of women academics in biomedical sciences] Open PDF(2020) ;Segovia-Saiz, Carla ;Briones-Vozmediano, Erica ;Pastells-Peiró, Roland ;González-María, EstherGea-Sánchez, MontserratOBJECTIVE: To identify in the international scientific literature the obstacles and potential promoters for the advancement of women academics and researchers in biomedical sciences during their professional careers. METHOD: PubMed, Scopus, CinahlPlus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycInfo and Sociological Abstracts were systematically searched for articles published in English and Spanish between January 2006 and December 2016 on the phenomenon of the glass ceiling in women academics and researchers in biomedical sciences. The screening was carried out by independent reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 2254 studies were found, of which 23 were included in the review. The obstacles identified for the promotion of women academics and/or researchers in biomedical sciences are: gender bias in the evaluation of research results, individualism and lack of collaboration, women's lack of influence, the existence of gender inequalities in access to employment. The perception of sexism and discrimination in the work environment, and the difficulties in reconciling work and family life. The promoting elements are: examples of women in leadership positions, mentoring, facilitating conciliation, transparency in recruitment, participation in decision-making, gender assessment of research, awareness of gender inequalities in institutions, promoting collaboration, and pay equity. CONCLUSIONS: By enhancing the elements favouring the promotion of academic women in biomedical sciences would help to reduce the glass ceiling in the career paths of women academics and health science researchers by increasing their participation, leadership and representation. A change of organizational and institutional values is required to achieve this.Item type:Publication, Gender inequalities among authors who contributed equally Open PDF(eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd, 2019) ;Broderick, Nichole A ;Casadevall, ArturoRodgers, Peter AWe analyzed 2898 scientific papers published between 1995 and 2017 in which two or more authors shared the first author position. For papers in which the first and second authors made equal contributions, mixed-gender combinations were most frequent, followed by male-male and then female-female author combinations. For mixed-gender combinations, more male authors were in the first position, although the disparity decreased over time. For papers in which three or more authors made equal contributions, there were more male authors than female authors in the first position and more all-male than all-female author combinations. The gender inequalities observed among authors who made equal contributions are not consistent with random or alphabetical ordering of authors. These results raise concerns about female authors not receiving proper credit for publications and suggest a need for journals to request clarity on the method used to decide author order among those who contributed equally.Item type:Publication, The Uneven Access to COVID-19 Research for Women in Science(arXiv.org, 2024) ;Biliotti, Carolina ;Verginer, LucaRiccaboni, MassimoThe COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated gender disparities in medical and academic careers. In this study, we examine the impact of COVID-19 as a new research topic on the presence of women in key authorship positions in biomedical research. We determine author's gender based on the names listed on their scientific publications and analyze the changes in the composition of the scientific teams after the COVID-19 outbreak. Using a Difference-in-Differences approach, we find that although the share of female authorships has increased overall, women are less likely to be first or last authors (the most prestigious positions) on COVID-19-related research papers and more likely to be found in middle author positions. Stay-at-home mandates, the journal importance and funding opportunities do not fully account for the decline of women in key author positions. The main difference in first authorship is due to the composition of the team and the experience of the lead authors in COVID-19 related research. First authorship by women declined after teams of novices emerged, where lead authors have no prior experience in COVID-related research. Discretionality in first-author appointments for newcomers, combined with high pressure to publish quickly, may have led to discriminatory biases. Conversely, there may also be differences in risk-taking attitudes in doing research in unfamiliar domains. Monitoring gender inequality in scientific production is crucial for reducing gender inequalities and for implementing timely policies that ensure equal access to emerging research topics.