PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
34 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Factors associated with homophobia in medical students from eleven Peruvian universities. Open PDF(2019) ;Nieto-Gutierrez, Wendy ;Komori-Pariona, Jorge K. ;Sánchez, Alice G. ;Centeno-Leguía, DercyArestegui-Sánchez, LizBACKGROUND: The consequences of homophobia can affect the integrity, mental and physical health of homosexual individuals in society. There are few studies in Peru that have evaluated homophobia in the medical student population. OBJECTIVE: To establish the social, educational and cultural factors associated with homophobia among Peruvian medical students. METHODS: A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted in 12 medicine schools in Peru. Homophobia was defined according to a validated test, which was associated with other variables. Statistical associations were identified. RESULTS: The lowest percentages of homophobic students (15-20%) were found in the four universities in Lima, while universities in the interior of the country had the highest percentages (22-62%). Performing a multivariate analysis, we found that the frequency of homophobia was lower for the following variables: the female gender (PRa=0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92; p=0.005), studying at a university in Lima (PRa=0.57; 95% CI, 0.43-0.75; p<0.001), professing the Catholic religion (PRa=0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.76; p<0.001), knowing a homosexual (PRa=0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.90; p=0.003) and having treated a homosexual patient (PRa=0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98; p=0.036). In contrast, the frequency of homophobia increased in male chauvinists (PRa=1.37; 95% CI, 1.09-1.72; p=0.007), adjusted by four variables. CONCLUSIONS: Homophobia was less common in women, in those who study in the capital, those who profess Catholicism and those who know/have treated a homosexual. In contrast, male chauvinists were more homophobic.Item type:Publication, A Feminist Quality Appraisal Tool: exposing gender bias and gender inequities in health research Open PDF(Routhledge, 2017) ;Morgan, T. ;Williams, L.A.Gott, M.Quality appraisal tools used in systematic reviews to evaluate health literature do not adequately address issues related to gender. This oversight is significant because disparities between genders have been identified as a major health equity concern, and systematic reviews are regarded as a powerful means for informing policy that could redress gender inequities. In this paper, we present our Feminist Quality Appraisal Tool that offers researchers a template to undertake a comprehensive gendered analysis of studies they review. Informed by a feminist perspective, the tool addresses issues of power, gender and inequity, thereby giving researchers the means to interrogate the scientific rigour of systematic reviews that focus on gender. Specifically, our tool outlines ways gender can be critically examined in terms of study design, data collection, analysis, discussion and recommendations. We argue that this tool has the potential to improve the provision of public health by providing solid understandings and critical reflections on the reasons why women continue to face barriers in their access to optimal health care. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.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, The gender and geography of publishing: a review of sex/gender reporting and author representation in leading general medical and global health journals Open PDF(2021) ;Merriman, Rebekah ;Galizia, Ilaria ;Tanaka, Sonja ;Sheffel, AshleyBuse, KentINTRODUCTION: Diverse gender and geographical representation matters in research. We aimed to review medical and global health journals' sex/gender reporting, and the gender and geography of authorship. METHODS: 542 research and non-research articles from 14 selected journals were reviewed using a retrospective survey design. Paper screening and systematic data extraction was conducted with descriptive statistics and regression analyses calculated from the coded data. Outcome measures were journal characteristics, the extent to which published articles met sex/gender reporting guidelines, plus author gender and location of their affiliated institution. RESULTS: Five of the fourteen journals explicitly encourage sex/gender analysis in their author instructions, but this did not lead to increased sex/gender reporting beyond the gender of study participants (OR=3.69; p=0.000 (CI 1.79 to 7.60)). Just over half of research articles presented some level of sex/gender analysis, while 40% mentioned sex/gender in their discussion. Articles with women first and last authors were 2.4 times more likely to discuss sex/gender than articles with men in those positions (p=0.035 (CI 1.062 to 5.348)). First and last authors from high-income countries (HICs) were 19 times as prevalent as authors from low-income countries; and women from low-income and middle-income countries were at a disadvantage in terms of the impact factor of the journals they published in. CONCLUSION: Global health and medical research fails to consistently apply a sex/gender lens and remains largely the preserve of authors in HIC. Collaborative partnerships and funding support are needed to promote gender-sensitive research and dismantle historical power dynamics in authorship.Item type:Publication, Male Chauvinism Among Peruvian Medical Students: Related Socio-Educational Factors in 12 Peruvian Universities. Open PDF(2019) ;Mejia, Christian R. ;Pulido-Flores, Jordy ;Quiñones-Laveriano, Dante M. ;Nieto-Gutierrez, WendyHeredia, PaulaINTRODUCTION: Male chauvinism is rooted in certain populations, but it has not been measured among those who will be responsible for healthcare. OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with male chauvinism among the medical students of 12 Peruvian universities. METHODS: Cross-sectional multicentre analytical study, with previously collected data, which used validated tests to measure male chauvinism and strong religious beliefs. In addition, other social and educational factors were analysed and the data was crossed. Descriptive and analytical statistics were obtained. RESULTS: In the multivariate analysis, we found an association between male chauvinism and religious non-believers (RP=1.88; 95% CI, 1.47-2.40), as well as being female (RP=0.35; 95% CI, 0.27-0.46). Of the 12 universities evaluated, the least chauvinistic university was in Lima. Using this university as a comparison category, the statistically more chauvinistic universities were a private university in Chiclayo (α=3.63; p<0.001), followed by a university in Huancayo (α=3.20; p=0.001), Huancayo national university (α=2.79; p<0.001) and the public university of Ica (α=2.32; p=0.006); the crossed data were adjusted for age. CONCLUSIONS: It was found that male chauvinism is greater among non-religious believers, men and in some universities, with a predominance of universities in the central highlands of Peru or that had migrants from the mountains. This is important, since it gives us an overview about this trait in those who will be responsible for the future healthcare of Peruvians.Item type:Publication, Gender Gap in Scientific Publications on COVID-19 in Italy During the First Wave of the Pandemic: An Observational Study Open PDF(2022) ;Mazzalai, Elena ;Turatto, FedericaDe Vito, CorradoBackground: Worldwide, concerns rise on how COVID-19 pandemic impacted heavily on women, even on those belonging to the scientific community. The Italian scientific production regarding the COVID-19 throughout the first months of the health emergency could help to understand the heft of female researchers in this unique period. Objectives: This study aims to investigate the gender gap in the scientific production on COVID-19 in Italy during the first months of the pandemic. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted and, for each included study, first and last author's gender, type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation, journal's Impact Factor (IF) and specialization were extracted. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed. Results: 22.2% of the articles were signed by a woman as first author, 18.1% as last authors. Female authorship was less frequent than male authorship regardless of the type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation and field of specialization. Conclusion: This analysis reveal a low prevalence of studies with a female first or last author and suggests that the low share of female authors publishing on COVID-19 during the considered timespan is a transversal issue throughout the Italian medical field.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, Quantifying gender disparity in physician authorship among commentary articles in three high-impact medical journals: an observational study Open PDF(2020) ;Mamtani, Mira ;Shofer, Frances ;Mudan, Anita ;Khatri, UtshaWalker, RachaelBACKGROUND: Scholarship plays a direct role in career advancement, promotion and authoritative recognition, and women physicians remain under-represented as authors of original research articles. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if women physician authors are similarly under-represented in commentary articles within high-impact journals. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In this observational study, we abstracted and analysed author information (gender and degree) and authorship position from commentary articles published in three high-impact journals between 1 January 2014 and 16 October 2018. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Authorship rate of commentary articles over a 5-year period by gender, degree, authorship position and journal. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare the proportion of men and women physician authorship of commentaries relative to the proportion of men and women physician faculty within academic medicine; and to examine the gender concordance among the last and first authors in articles with more than one author. RESULTS: Of the 2087 articles during the study period, 48% were men physician first authors compared with 17% women physician first authors (p<0.0001). Of the 1477 articles with more than one author, similar distributions were found with regard to last authors: 55% were men physicians compared with only 12% women physicians (p<0.0001). The proportion of women physician first authors increased over time; however, the proportion of women physician last authors remained stagnant. Women coauthored with women in the first and last authorship positions in 9% of articles. In contrast, women coauthored with men in the first and last author positions, respectively, in 55% of articles. CONCLUSIONS: Women physician authors remain under-represented in commentary articles compared with men physician authors in the first and last author positions. Women also coauthored commentaries with other women in far fewer numbers.Item type:Publication, Gender in authorship and editorship in medical education journals: A bibliometric review Open PDF(2021) ;Madden, Caoimhe ;O'Malley, Róisín ;O'Connor, Paul ;O'Dowd, EmilyByrne, DaraCONTEXT: Gender bias has been observed in the authorship and editorship of academic literature in varied medical specialties. This is important as peer-reviewed publications, and participation on editorial boards, are closely related to academic productivity and advancement. The aim of this paper was to examine whether gender-based disparities in authorship and editorship exist in leading medical education journals. METHODS: A retrospective bibliometric review was conducted of articles published at eight different time-points across a 49-year time period (specifically: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2019) in four leading medical education journals (Academic Medicine, BMC Medical Education, Medical Education and Medical Teacher). First and last (as a proxy for senior) author gender was determined for each article, along with the gender of the 2019 editorial board members of each journal. Chi-square tests for trend were conducted to examine variations in author gender distributions over time, and binomial tests of proportions were conducted to examine gender distributions in authorship and editorship in 2019. Logistic regression analyses were carried out to determine factors that predicted the odds of authorship by women. RESULTS: A total of 5749 articles were included. A significant trend of increased women as first and last authors was observed across all journals. The percentage of women first authors increased from 6.6% in 1970 to 53.7% in 2019 (P < .001), and women last authors increased from 9.5% in 1970 to 46% in 2019 (P < .001). Overall, the distributions of women first authors, last authors and editorial board members in 2019 indicated greater gender parity than many other fields of medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Positive progress towards gender parity has been made in medical education scholarship. However, future research and efforts are needed to ensure the continued participation, and highlighting, of women in medical education scholarship and to address other factors which may hinder academic advancement for women in this field.Item type:Publication, Do Gender-Based Disparities in Authorship and Editorship Exist in Healthcare Simulation Journals? A Bibliometric Review of the Research Open PDF(2021) ;Lydon, Sinéad ;Madden, Caoimhe ;De Bhulbh, Áine ;Maher, SenanByrne, DaraSUMMARY STATEMENT: Publication in peer-reviewed journals, and serving on editorial boards, is considered an indicator of academic productivity and success, and a means of influencing discourse and practice in a field. This bibliometric review explored gender in authorship, and editorship, across the 3 existing English language, nonspecialty specific healthcare simulation journals. In total, 40.4% of publications had women first authors and 34.4% had women senior authors. There were no differences by journal and no apparent changes over time. Poor participation of women on editorial boards (38.1% of editorial board members were women) was observed. The observed level of representation of women as first and senior authors, and on editorial boards, is comparable with other health sciences domains but nonetheless warrants attention and improvement. Future research examining the profile of those working within simulation or evaluating strategies to improve the participation of women within healthcare simulation research and journals would be of interest.