PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
15 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Women faculty members’ challenges when pursuing leadership positions in academic dentistry: A survey Open PDF(Wiley, 2024-12-16) ;Cain, Lisa D. ;Andrews, Elizabeth ;Joy‐Thomas, Anita ;Mathu‐Muju, Kavita R.ElHachem, LeaPurpose/objectives This study addresses persistent gender disparities in leadership roles in academic dentistry. The objectives were to identify the challenges and barriers to leadership that women face in general and during the COVID‐19 pandemic, as well as to describe resources they need to reach their leadership potential. Methods The American Dental Education Association Section on Women in Leadership (WIL), gathered survey data concerning leadership challenges and faculty development needs. The survey targeted 300 WIL members in leadership roles or aspiring to leadership roles. It was conducted from January to March 2021 and 128 participants responded (response rate: 42.7%). The data was analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Results The most frequent reported leadership barriers indicated by the survey respondents were lack of mentoring, limited leadership training, lack of sponsorship from administration, family obligations and limited job opportunities. The participants stated that the COVID‐19 pandemic exacerbated these challenges, affecting collaborations, increasing stress, and impacting scholarly productivity. The survey responses showed how external factors can challenge faculty productivity. Respondents identified mentoring, increased leadership opportunity awareness, and leadership development seminars as factors most helpful for their professional development. Conclusions This study identified women faculty members’ perceptions of why disparities persist in gender equity in leadership in dental education. It suggests developing gender specific leadership strategies and resources. Addressing barriers requires concerted efforts at the institutional, national, and global levels. This is vital for achieving gender parity in leadership roles in dental education settings.Item type:Publication, Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists Open PDF(Nature Publishing Group, 2020) ;Myers, Kyle R. ;Tham, Wei Yang ;Yin, Yian ;Cohodes, NinaThursby, Jerry G.COVID-19 has not affected all scientists equally. A survey of principal investigators indicates that female scientists, those in the ‘bench sciences’ and, especially, scientists with young children experienced a substantial decline in time devoted to research. This could have important short- and longer-term effects on their careers, which institution leaders and funders need to address carefully.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, WeiMason, RobinOBJECTIVES: 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, Toward Gender Equity in Academic Promotions Open PDF(American Medical Association, 2021) ;Marcotte, Leah M ;Arora, Vineet MGanguli, IshaniPromotion in academicmedicinedrives career opportunities, including leadership roles and salary increases. Yet women physicians face slower promotional timelines and are less likely to reach associate or full professorship compared with their male counterparts, a gap that has not meaningfully changed in more than 3 decades. 1In 2019, only 26% of full professors and 39% of associate professors in US medical schools were women despite representing 48% of assistant professors and 43% of all full-time US medical school faculty. 2 These disparities are even worse for women in underrepresentedminority groups. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a worrisome backslide.3 In leaving unrealized the full potential of female faculty, these disparities are detrimental to medicine as a whole. The promotion gapmaybepartiallyexplainedbyoutdated promotion processes that were developed when the physician workforce was largely male but now serve to disadvantage women throughout their academic careers. Too often we put the onus on women to change their behavior, but closing this gap will require institutions to make promotion systems and policies more equitable. In this Viewpoint, we unpack structural barriers to promotion, specifically for female junior faculty going from assistant to associate professor. We consider how institutionscan rethinkpromotionand reverseharms that were precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to promote gender equity leading up to promotion and at the time of promotion.Item type:Publication, The glass ceiling thickens: the impact of COVID-19 on academic medicine faculty in the United States Open PDF(2022) ;Lufler, Rebecca S.McNulty, Margaret A.The inequities faced by women in academic Medicine before the COVID-19 pandemic are well established. However, there is little formal data regarding exactly how the pandemic has affected faculty. This cross-sectional study investigated the impact of the pandemic on responsibilities at home, work, and mental health according to gender identification, faculty rank, and faculty appointment. In February 2021, an online questionnaire was broadly distributed to academic medicine faculty. Respondents were asked to provide demographic data, answer questions about their responsibilities at home and work, mental health, and how the pandemic has influenced these. Respondents were also asked to document what their institution(s) can do to help faculty through the pandemic. Responses were analyzed via Pearson's chi-square tests and thematic analysis. Women faculty were more likely to be responsible for the care of others (70%, p = 0.014), and the impact was negative, especially for early career faculty (p = 0.019). Productivity in research, teaching, and clinical practice were negatively impacted, with women feeling this in clinical practice (p = 0.005), increased teaching load (p = 0.042), and inadequate work environment (p = 0.013). In the areas of self-care and mental health, women (p < 0.001), early career-faculty (p < 0.001), and clinical faculty (p = 0.029) were more negatively impacted. Early-career women were more likely to fear retribution. Five themes emerged, including Flexible Expectations, Support, Mental Health, Compensation, and Communication. Pre-pandemic stress and burnout were rampant, and this study demonstrates that academic medicine faculty are still suffering. It is the authors' hope that administrations can utilize these data to make informed decisions regarding policies enacted to assist populations who are most vulnerable to the effects of the pandemic.Item type:Publication, Creating a path forward: Reimagining pathways to improve gender equity in authorship Open PDF(2023) ;Linker, ASJones, CItem type:Publication, Academic Productivity Differences by Gender and Child Age in Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine Faculty During the COVID-19 Pandemic Open PDF(2021) ;Krukowski, Rebecca A. ;Jagsi, ReshmaCardel, Michelle I.Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, most faculty in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) began working from home, including many who were simultaneously caring for children. The objective was to assess associations of gender and parental status with self-reported academic productivity before (i.e., mid-January to mid-March 2020) and during the pandemic (i.e., mid-March to mid-May 2020). Materials and Methods: STEMM faculty in the United States (N = 284, 67.6% women, 57.0% with children younger than the age of 18 years living at home) completed a survey about the number of hours worked and the frequency of academic productivity activities. Results: There was no significant difference in the hours worked per week by gender (men, M [standard deviation, SD] = 45.8 [16.7], women = 43.1 [16.3]). Faculty with 0-5-year-old children reported significantly fewer work hours (33.7 [13.9]) compared to all other groups (No children = 49.2 [14.9], 6-11 years old = 48.3 [13.9], and 12-17 years old = 49.5 [13.9], p < 0.0001). Women's self-reported first/corresponding author's and coauthor's article submissions decreased significantly between the two time periods; men's productivity metrics did not change. Faculty with 0-5-year-old children completed significantly fewer peer review assignments, attended fewer funding panel meetings, and submitted fewer first authors' articles during the pandemic compared to the previous period. Those with children aged 6 years or older at home or without children at home reported significant increases or stable productivity. Conclusions: Overall, significant disparities were observed in academic productivity by gender and child age during the pandemic and if confirmed by further research, should be considered by academic institutions and funding agencies when making decisions regarding funding and hiring as well as promotion and tenure.Item type:Publication, The Pandemic and Gender Inequality in Academia Open PDF(Cambridge University Press, 2022) ;Kim, EunjiPatterson, ShawnHas the pandemic exacerbated gender inequality in academia? We provide real- time evidence by analyzing 1.8 million tweets from approximately 3,000 political scientists, leveraging their use of social media for career advancement. Using automated text analysis and difference-in-differences estimation, we find that although faculty members of both genders were affected by the pandemic, the shift to remote work caused women to tweet less often than their male colleagues about professional accomplishments. We argue that these effects are driven by the increased familial obligations placed on women, as demonstrated by the increase in family-related tweets and the more pronounced effects among junior academics. Our evidence demonstrating the gendered shift in professional visibility during the pandemic provides the opportunity for proactive efforts to address disparities that otherwise may take years to manifest.Item type:Publication, COVID-19 gender policy changes support female scientists and improve research quality Open PDF(2021) ;Witteman, H.O. ;Haverfield, J.Tannenbaum, C.With more time being spent on caregiving responsibilities during the COVID-19 pandemic, female scientists' productivity dropped. When female scientists conduct research, identity factors are better incorporated in research content. In order to mitigate damage to the research enterprise, funding agencies can play a role by putting in place gender equity policies that support all applicants and ensure research quality. A national health research funder implemented gender policy changes that included extending deadlines and factoring sex and gender into COVID-19 grant requirements. Following these changes, the funder received more applications from female scientists, awarded a greater proportion of grants to female compared to male scientists, and received and funded more grant applications that considered sex and gender in the content of COVID-19 research. Further work is urgently required to address inequities associated with identity characteristics beyond gender. © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.Item type:Publication, Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Authorship Gender in The Journal of Pediatrics: Disproportionate Productivity by International Male Researchers Open PDF(2021) ;Williams, W.A., II ;Li, A. ;Goodman, D.M.Ross, L.F.Objective: To assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on authorship gender in articles submitted to The Journal of Pediatrics. Study design: Using gender-labeling algorithms and human inspection, we inferred the gender of corresponding authors of original articles submitted in January-February and April-May of 2019 and 2020 noting those articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Pearson χ2 tests to determine differences in gender proportions during the selected periods in the US and internationally. Results: We analyzed 1521 original articles. Submissions increased 10.9% from January-February 2019 to January-February 2020 and 61.6% from April-May 2019 to April-May 2020. Women accounted for 56.0% of original articles in April-May 2019 but only 49.8% of original articles in April-May 2020. Original articles focused on COVID-19 represented a small percentage of additional articles submitted in January-February 2020 (1/33 or 3.0%) and (53/199 or 26.6%) in April-May 2020 compared with the number of submissions in the same months in 2019. International male corresponding authors submitted a significantly larger proportion of original articles compared with international female corresponding authors in April-May 2020 compared to April-May 2019 (P = .043). There was no difference in corresponding author gender proportion in the US (US in April-May of 2020 vs April-May of 2019; P = .95). There was no significant difference in final dispositions based on corresponding author gender for original articles from 2019 and 2020 (P = .17). Conclusions: Original article submissions to The Journal increased in April-May 2020, with the greatest increase by international male corresponding authors. The majority of the submission growth was not related to COVID-19. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.