PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Covid-19Subject: search.filters.subject.Productivity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Will COVID-19 result in a giant step backwards for women in academic science? Open PDF 
    (Elsevier, 2021)
    Shamseer, Larissa
    ;
    Bourgeault, Ivy
    ;
    Grunfeld, Eva
    ;
    Moore, Ainsley
    ;
    Peer, Nazia
    COVID-19 has disproportionately placed women in academic science on the frontlines of domestic and clinical care compared to men. As a result, women in science are publishing less and potentially acquiring less funding during COVID-19 than compared to before. This widens the pre-existing gap between men and women in prevailing, publication-based measures of productivity used to determine academic career progression. Early career women and those with intersectional identities associated with greater inequities, are facing unique challenges during this time. We argue that women will fall further behind unless academic reward systems adjust how and what they evaluate. We propose several strategies that academic institutions, funders, journals, and men in academic science can take.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in Publication Authorship During COVID-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of High-Impact Cardiology Journals Open PDF 
    (2021)
    DeFilippis, Ersilia M.
    ;
    Sinnenberg, Lauren
    ;
    Mahmud, Nadim
    ;
    Wood, Malissa J.
    ;
    Hayes, Sharonne N.
    Background The purpose of this study was to examine gender differences in authorship of manuscripts in select high-impact cardiology journals during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods and Results All manuscripts published between March 1, 2019 to June 1, 2019 and March 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 in 4 high-impact cardiology journals (Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, JAMA Cardiology, and European Heart Journal) were identified using bibliometric data. Authors' genders were determined by matching first name with predicted gender using a validated multinational database (Genderize.io) and manual adjudication. Proportions of women and men first, co-first, senior, and co-senior authors, manuscript types, and whether the manuscript was COVID-19 related were recorded. In 2019, women were first authors of 176 (22.3%) manuscripts and senior authors of 99 (15.0%) manuscripts. In 2020, women first authored 230 (27.4%) manuscripts and senior authored 138 (19.3%) manuscripts. Proportions of woman first and senior authors were significantly higher in 2020 compared with 2019. Women were more likely to be first authors if the manuscript's senior author was a woman (33.8% for woman first/woman senior versus 23.4% for woman first/man senior; P<0.001). Women were less likely to be first authors of COVID-19-related original research manuscripts (P=0.04). Conclusions Representation of women as key authors of manuscripts published in major cardiovascular journals increased during the early COVID-19 pandemic compared with similar months in 2019. However, women were significantly less likely to be first authors of COVID-19-related original research manuscripts. Future investigation into the gender-disparate impacts of COVID-19 on academic careers is critical.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Inequality in Research Productivity During the COVID-19 Pandemic Open PDF 
    (INFORMS Inst.for Operations Res.and the Management Sciences, 2022)
    Cui, R.
    ;
    Ding, H.
    ;
    Zhu, F.
    Problem definition: We study the disproportionate impact of the lockdown as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak on female and male academic research productivity in social science. Academic/practical relevance: The lockdown has caused substantial disruptions to academic activities, requiring people to work from home. How this disruption affects productivity and the related gender equity is an important operations and societal question. Methodology: We collect data from the largest open-access preprint repository for social science on 41,858 research preprints in 18 disciplines produced by 76,832 authors across 25 countries over a span of two years. We use a difference-in-differences approach leveraging the exogenous pandemic shock. Results: Our results indicate that, in the 10 weeks after the lockdown in the United States, although total research productivity increased by 35%, female academics’ productivity dropped by 13.2% relative to that of male academics. We also show that this intensified productivity gap is more pronounced for assistant professors and for academics in top-ranked universities and is found in six other countries. Managerial implications: Our work points out the fairness issue in productivity caused by the lockdown, a finding that universities will find helpful when evaluating faculty productivity. It also helps organizations realize the potential unintended consequences that can arise from telecommuting. © 2021 INFORMS