PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10
  • Item type:Publication,
    Experiences of Women Faculty in an Academic Medical Center Open PDF 
    (SAGE Publications, 2025-03-13)
    Esplin, Charlotte R.
    ;
    Calderwood, Lisa
    ;
    Weisenmuller, Chantel M.
    ;
    Luzier, Jessica L.
    BACKGROUND: Women faculty face different obstacles in academic medical careers than their men counterparts. Women faculty report feeling like "outsiders" and experiencing multiple barriers to career advancement compared with men, especially if they hold a nonmedical degree (e.g., PhD). This study examined aspects of workplace culture that differentially impact women at a large regional academic medical center (AMC) in the Appalachian region of the United States-a geographic area that is largely understudied in this body of literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven women completed a survey that included the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success instrument, the Professional Fulfillment Index, the Work and Family Conflict scale, and items measuring burnout, childcare availability, and demographic factors. RESULTS: Our findings revealed that many women faculty felt that they were being treated differently than men faculty, that work infringed on their home and family life, and that while they were professionally fulfilled at work, childcare problems exacerbated feelings of wanting to leave that AMC. About 60% of our sample indicated some level of burnout. CONCLUSIONS: These findings align with previous findings that women juggle multiple roles that are typically not expected of men, and this juggling may be one reason why women are not staying in academic medicine or being promoted at the same rate as men. We provide incremental validity for the measures used and delineate specific ideas for improvement, such as on-site childcare, standardized leave policies, and formal mentorship and curriculum programs.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Evolution of Female Leadership in MedicineBibliometric Analysis and Evaluation of the Last 50 Years Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Mendoza, C.S.
    ;
    Gomez, A.P.B.
    ;
    Tobar, V.
    ;
    Carvajal, L.C.
    ;
    Vega, J.
    Objective Perform a biometrical analysis of female leadership in medicine, in order to know the actual perspective and guide future research. Materials and Methods: A retrospective descriptive bibliometric analysis of the literature available in MEDLINE was performed in relation to the leadership of female physicians from 1973 to 2019, through MEDLINE database, using GoPubmed and FABUMED. The following strategy was deployed: ("Leadership"[Mesh]) AND "Physicians, Women"[Mesh] (1973:2019[dp]). Original articles, journal articles, essays, scientific reports and reviews were included to analyze all related indexed literature. To obtain the impact factor (FI), the Journal Citation Reports (7) 2017/2018 of the journals found was used to estimate the quality of each one of them. Results A total of 310 references were found in 139 published journals, 71.2% were original articles; the remaining 22% were reviews. There was a 11.9% increase in publications from 1996 to 2019. The journals with the highest rate of publications were: Academic Medicine and J Womens Health (Larchmt) with 7.7% and 7.1%. Countries with the highest number of publications were United States with 66 (56%), and United Kingdom with 10 (8.6%). Latin America has four publications, while Colombia has none. Conclusion Female leadership in the medical field and the publications regarding this subject have increased in the last decades, mainly in developed countries. Latin America has to make significant efforts to produce more publications in journals with high impact factor, in order to close the gender gap in the medical field. © 2021 Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.. All rights reserved.
  • 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,
    Narrowing gender gap in the research on echinococcosis and editorial contribution of women in parasitology journals Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Kaveh, R.
    ;
    Ashrafhesari, N.
    ;
    Mousavi, S.M.
    ;
    Fasihi Harandi, M.
    Gender equity and authorship diversity are believed to be the essential parts of building a dynamic scientific atmosphere. The purpose of the present study was to determine the status of gender equity in research on echinococcosis and the editorial diversity in major parasitology journals over the past four decades. All articles were retrieved from major databases from the years 1980, 2000, 2010, 2015, and 2020. Journals belonging to the four quartiles of parasitology journals listed in the Journal Citation Report were selected, and the gender and region of each editorial member were identified. Among the 3583 first authors of the articles published in all selected years, 2236 (62.4%) were men, whereas 1040 (29%) were women. There was a significant increase in women's contributions as the first author, from 6.8% in 1980 to 35.8% in 2020 (P <.001). A greater gender gap was found for the senior authors, showing 2391 (66.7%) men and 837 (23.4%) women. The gender gap has been narrowed in most of the six regions of the world, particularly for the Western Pacific region, where the gender inequity had almost diminished in 2020; i.e.The man-woman ratios of the first and last authors from this region were 2.25 and 1.75 in 1980, reaching 1.04 and 0.97, in 2020, respectively. Our findings also indicated that articles authored by men received 2.5 to 3.1 times more citations than women authors. Gender distribution of the editors-in-chief, associate editors, and editorial board members across all quartiles showed that 78.7%, 69.5%, and 72.7% were men, respectively, and mostly affiliated with the European and American regions. Findings of the present study showed that gender inequity is still present and women researchers continue to be the minority in the field of parasitology, particularly in the research on echinococcosis. © The Author(s), 2024.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences and cooperation in medical authorships - an analysis of the recent ten years in five key medical disciplines Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Yamamura, J.
    ;
    Molwitz, I.
    ;
    Ozga, A.-K.
    ;
    Nguyen, T.-A.
    ;
    Wedekind, I.
    Background: Career prospects in academic medicine are strongly linked to scientific authorship and this marker has been widely used as an indicator of gender equity in academia. However, direct comparisons of medical disciplines regarding their proportion of female physicians (FP) in different countries are missing. This study examines the gender parity and gender cooperation using first authorships (FA) and senior authorships (SA) of scientific publications in five medical disciplines and six different OECD countries over a 10-year time-trend. Methods: Articles from three high-impact journals in each of the medical discipline radiology, urology, surgery, gynecology, and pediatrics from the years 2007/8 and 2017/18 were retrospectively reviewed. The gender and affiliation location of the FA and SA of original research articles and reviews were assigned and compared with the proportion of in each discipline for the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan. Mantel-Haenszel test and multinomial logistic regression models were used to calculate differences in proportions of women authors and FP and to assess trends and proportions of FA and SA. Results: 30,803 articles were evaluated. Equally, with rising proportions of FP in all disciplines, the number of women authors increased across years. The shares of women FAs were either significantly higher (urology/surgery/gynecology) or balanced (pediatrics/radiology) compared to the proportion of FP. In contrast, the shares of women SA were balanced only in disciplines with a low proportion of FP (urology and surgery) and otherwise reduced. Women same-gender cooperation was as common as men same-gender cooperation and preferred over a women-led mixed gender cooperation in disciplines where this seemed to be practicable due to the high proportions of FP. Conclusion: In contrast to FA, a significant disparity persists in SA, particularly in disciplines with a high proportion of FP. The discrepancy between FA and SA may reflect, among others, dropout from an academic career in early or mid-academic levels, for example, due to structural inequality; together with the findings on gender preference in authorship collaborations, this may inform future strategies for promoting equal career advancement for women physicians. © 2023, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Inequalities in Citations of Articles Published in High-Impact General Medical Journals: a Cross-Sectional Study Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Sebo, Paul
    ;
    Clair, Carole
    BACKGROUND: Besides the number of publications, the number of citations is another key metric often used to compare researchers with each other. While women researchers tend to have fewer publications than their men colleagues, the data is scarce for the number of citations. We aimed to determine whether there is a gender gap in citations. METHODS: We used Web of Science to retrieve the number of citations per year for all research articles and reviews published between January 2015 and December 2019 in fourteen high-impact general medical journals (impact factor > 5). We used Gender API to identify the gender of the first/last authors. We compared the results by gender using multivariable negative binomial regressions (adjusting for intra-cluster correlations within journals). RESULTS: The gender of the first/last author was determined for 13,218/13,350 (99%) and 11,894/12,026 (99%) articles, respectively. The proportion of women among first/last authors was 40% and 29%, respectively. The median number of citations per year was 5 (IQR = 11.3) for women and 6.8 (IQR = 17.8) for men for first authors (IRR = 1.5 [95% CI = 1.3-1.8], p value < 0.001), and 6 (IQR = 12.4) and 7.5 (IQR = 17.4) for last authors (IRR = 1.3 [95% CI = 1.2-1.5], p value < 0.001). Articles whose first and last authors were women were the least cited and those whose first and last authors were men were the most cited. CONCLUSION: In this cross-sectional study, we found that articles authored by women were cited less often than those authored by men. Further studies are needed to explore the reasons for these gender differences in article citations.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does Gender Bias Still Affect Women in Science? Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Roper, Rachel L.
    The percentage of women employed in professional scientific positions has been low but is increasing over time. The U.S. National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation have both implemented programs to improve women's participation in science, and many universities and companies have diversity and equity programs. While most faculty and scientists believe that they are fair and unbiased, numerous well-designed studies published in leading peer-reviewed journals show that gender bias in sciences and medicine is widespread and persistent today in both faculty and students. Recent studies show that gender bias affects student grading, professional hiring, mentoring, tenure, promotion, respect, grant proposal success, and pay. In addition, sexual harassment remains a significant barrier. Fortunately, several studies provide evidence that programs that raise conscious awareness of gender bias can improve equity in science, and there are a number of recommendations and strategies for improving the participation of women.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Female authorship in the revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica: Analysis for the period 1997-2017 Open PDF 
    (2019)
    García-Aguilar, D.
    ;
    Heredia-Mimbela, I.
    ;
    Pereyra-Elías, R.
    Objectives. To explore female authorship trends among the articles published in the Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública between 1997 and 2017, as well as its association with characteristics of the research teams. Materials and Methods. We conducted a bibliometric analysis. We evaluated time trends of several forms of female participation in authorship, including “privileged authorship roles” (first author, corresponding author and senior author) and the proportion of female authors (out of the total number of authors). We compared female authorship according to the participation of medical doctors and authors from non-Peruvian institutions. Results. We analysed 1606/1621 articles; 46.3% were original articles. 63.5% had at least one female author, whilst 92.8% had at least one male author. A woman was the first, corresponding or senior author in 29.6%, 27.8% and 26.9% of the articles, respectively. 33% of authors per article were female (median). These figures did not considerably vary between the start and end of the study period. For original articles, female authorship was less likely if medical doctors were listed in the privileged authorship roles and more likely, if authors from non-Peruvian institutions were. Editorial processing times were longer when a woman served a privileged authorship role. Conclusions. Women served privileged authorship roles in less than a third of all articles. Apparently, these gaps have not improved over time. The composition of the research team predicts female authorship. © 2019, Instituto Nacional de Salud. All rights reserved.
  • 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.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Use of a Coordinated Social Media Strategy to Improve Dissemination of Research and Collect Solutions Related to Workforce Gender Equity. Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Cawcutt, Kelly A.
    ;
    Erdahl, Lillian M.
    ;
    Englander, Meridith J.
    ;
    Radford, Diane M.
    ;
    Oxentenko, Amy S.
    Background: To increase awareness, search for solutions, and drive change, disparity-related research needs to be strategically disseminated. This study aimed to quantify whether a social media strategy could: (1) amplify dissemination of gender equity-related articles and (2) collect proposed solutions to gender equity issues. Methods: In April 2018, eight published journal articles covering separate gender equity issues were presented in a 1-hour Twitter chat hosted by Physician's Weekly. Metrics data were collected before, during, and after the chat. During the chat, one question related to each article was tweeted at a time. Qualitative data were extracted from responses and evaluated for thematic content. Results: In the 16-hour period during and following the chat, we tallied 1500 tweets from 294 participants and 8.6 million impressions (potential views). The Altmetric Attention Score of each article increased (average, 126.5 points; range, 91-208 points). Within the respective journal, the Altmetric Rank of seven articles improved (range, 3 to ≥19), while the eighth maintained its #1 rank. The one article for which share and download data were available experienced a 729% increase in shares following prechat posts and another 113% bump after the chat, a 1667% increase overall (n = 45-795). Similarly, downloads, and presumably reads, increased 712% following prechat posts and another 47% bump after the chat, a 1093% increase overall (n = 394-4700). We tallied 181 potential solutions to the eight gender equity-related questions. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that social media can be used strategically to increase the dissemination of research articles and collect solution-focused feedback.