PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Health SciencesSubject: search.filters.subject.Academic Medicine

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    The proportion of male and female editors in women's health journals: A critical analysis and review of the sex gap Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Grinnell, Madison
    ;
    Higgins, Shauna
    ;
    Yost, Kelli
    ;
    Ochuba, Olivia
    ;
    Lobl, Marissa
    BACKGROUND: Historically, women have been underrepresented in leadership positions in medicine. The reasons for this are multifactorial. In recent years, women's representation in medicine has improved. However, inequities in the proportion of men and women in medical leadership remain, especially with regard to editorial journal boards. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore current trends of women in leadership positions on journal editorial boards. METHODS: A comprehensive search for women's health journals was performed in collaboration with university librarians in February 2019 using EMBASE, Scopus, SciFinder, and MEDLINE records for journals with relevance to women's health. Each journal was e-mailed to verify the accuracy of the journal editorial boards listed on their respective webpages. Five categories, as well as the totals for each journal, were analyzed for the proportion of women versus men: editor-in-chief, associate editor, deputy editor, and section editor, and other. RESULTS: Women comprised the minority of positions on women's health editorial boards. Of the total 1440 board members included, 602 members (42%) were women and 838 members (58%) were men. Women occupied 54 of 132 editor-in-chief positions (41%), 257 of 596 associate editor positions (43%), 13 of 42 deputy editor positions (30%), 46 of 120 section editor positions (38%), and 232 of 549 other editor positions (42%). CONCLUSION: Although the sex gap in leadership in medicine is improving, it is still present. Our findings suggest that women are underrepresented as editors at most levels in women's health journals centered on topics such as reproductive health, obstetrics and gynecology, perinatology, gynecological oncology, and breastfeeding. With sponsorship/mentorship for women, flexible scheduling, and considerate thought in leadership appointment, this sex gap will continue to improve.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women's Careers in Biomedical Sciences: Implications for the Economy, Scientific Discovery, and Women's Health Open PDF 
    (2017)
    Plank-Bazinet, Jennifer L.
    ;
    Heggeness, Misty L.
    ;
    Lund, P. Kay
    ;
    Clayton, Janine Austin
    While women have been well represented in medical school and biomedical doctoral degree programs, they do not comprise half of academic medicine faculty positions. Furthermore, there is a significant paucity of women in academic medicine leadership positions, as evidenced by the fact that only 16% of dean positions at United States Medical schools are filled by women. In this commentary, the authors review the state of women in academic medicine and argue that increased representation of women in the academic workforce will lead to economic gains, increased scientific discovery, and improvements to women's health.
  • Item type:Publication,
    No Room to "Lean In": A Qualitative Study on Gendered Barriers to Promotion and Leadership. Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Ellinas, Elizabeth H.
    ;
    Kaljo, Kristina
    ;
    Patitucci, Teresa N.
    ;
    Novalija, Jutta
    ;
    Byars-Winston, Angela
    INTRODUCTION: The gender gap in professorship and leadership roles persists in academic medicine, whereas reasons for these disparities remain unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Open-ended text responses to a 2013 faculty engagement survey were analyzed by using the grounded theory and consensual qualitative analysis techniques. The authors grouped 491 faculty's text responses into descriptive codes and three themes: (1) No Obstacles, (2) Barriers to Success, and (3) Concerns Regarding Processes. Demographics of codes were compared by using chi-square analysis. RESULTS: Male faculty identified barriers that included negative views of leadership or leaders. Female faculty, especially those in clinical roles, expressed barriers related to role overload, including that the demands of their current positions prevented advancement or addition of further roles, no matter how desirable further roles may be. Women also shared that considerable self-promotion was required to receive acknowledgement of their work and support by leadership. CONCLUSION: A proposed framework depicts male and female faculty's concerns on a continuum. No Obstacle and Process Concerns were relatively gender neutral, whereas large gender disparities occurred within the Barriers to Success theme. Women's barriers largely revolved around internal obstacles (I can't do any more), and men's barriers largely revolved around external factors (leaders are impeding my progress). Resources are needed to mitigate work overload specifically for female faculty, and to ensure that all faculty are both engaged in advanced career opportunities and encouraged to pursue leadership positions.