PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
27 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, United States Medical School Academic Faculty Workforce Diversity, Institutional Characteristics, and Geographical Distributions From 2014-2018(2022) ;Ogunyemi, Dotun ;Okekpe, C. Camille ;Barrientos, Devin R. ;Bui, TinaAu, Melanie N.Purpose Academic healthcare workforce diversity is important in addressing health disparities. Our goal was to evaluate trends and associations in faculty diversity of United States (US) medical schools over a five-year period. Methods We analyzed the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster data of 151 US medical schools from 2014-2018. Outcome faculty variables were female gender, underrepresented in medicine (UiM), age, and professorial representation. Predictor variables included geographical distributions, and institutional characteristics. Statistical analysis included Jonckheere-Terpstra test, ANOVA, and regression analysis. Results Female faculty increased from 37.6% to 40.4% (p<0.001), senior faculty (age >60 years) from 22.6% to 25.9% (p=0.001) while UiM faculty stayed relatively flat from 9.74% to 10.08% (p=0.773). UiM [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.39, p=0.015], and female faculty (aOR=0.3, p=0.001) had independently significantly decreased associations with professorial representation, while senior faculty had increased associations (aOR=3.82, p<0.001). Significant independent differences occurred in female, UiM, and professorial faculty distributions within US regions; Hispanic faculty were highest in Southwest (6.57%) and lowest in Midwest region (1.59%), while African-American faculty were highest in Southeast (8.15%) but lowest in the West (3.12%). UiM faculty had significantly independent decreased associations with MD/PhD degree (aOR=0.30, p=0.004) and higher US ranking institutions (aOR=0.45, p=0.009). Conclusions From 2014 to 2018, female faculty increased modestly while the UiM faculty trend remained flat. Female and UiM faculty were less represented at the professor level. UiM faculty were less represented in higher-ranking institutions. Geographic location is associated with faculty diversity.Item type:Publication, A Data-Based Approach to Evaluating Representation by Gender and Affiliation in Key Presentation Formats at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Epidemiologic Research Open PDF(2021) ;Nobles, C.J. ;Lu, Y.-L. ;Andriessen, V.C. ;Bevan, S.S.Radoc, J.G.The annual meeting of the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) is a major forum for sharing new research and promoting the career development of participants. Because of this, evaluating representation in key presentation formats is critical. For the 3,257 presentations identified at the 2015-2017 SER annual meetings, we evaluated presenter characteristics, including gender, affiliation, subject area, and h-index, and representation in 3 highlighted presentation formats: platform talks (n = 382), invited symposium talks (n = 273), and chairing a concurrent contributed session or symposium (n = 188). Data were abstracted from SER records, abstract booklets, and programs. Gender was assessed using GenderChecker software, and h-index was determined using the Scopus application programming interface. Log-binomial models were adjusted for participant characteristics and conference year. In adjusted models, women were less likely than men to present an invited symposium talk (relative risk = 0.60, 95% confidence interval: 0.45, 0.81) compared with all participants with accepted abstracts. Researchers from US public universities, US government institutions, and international institutions were less likely to present a symposium talk or to chair a concurrent contributed session or symposium than were researchers from US private institutions. The research areas that were most represented in platform talks were epidemiologic methods, social epidemiology, and cardiovascular epidemiology. Our findings suggest differences in representation by gender, affiliation, and subject area after accounting for h-index. © 2021 Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.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, 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, 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, When perception is reality: Resident perception of faculty gender parity in a university-based internal medicine residency program. Open PDF(2019) ;Lukela, Jennifer Reilly ;Ramakrishnan, Aditi ;Hadeed, NicoleDel Valle, JohnINTRODUCTION: Although women have entered medical school and internal medicine residency programs in significant numbers for decades, women faculty remain underrepresented in senior and departmental leadership roles. How residents perceive this gender disparity is unknown. We sought to assess resident perception of gender parity among departmental leadership and teaching faculty in our internal medicine department, and to determine the actual gender distribution of those faculty roles. METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was distributed to evaluate resident perception of gender representation of various faculty roles. Using conference schedules, resident evaluations, and our department website, we determined the actual representation of women faculty in department leadership roles, and in clinical and educational activities. RESULTS: 88 of 164 residents (54%) responded. Women residents were less likely than men to perceive that women faculty were equally represented in department leadership (45% men agreed vs. 13% women, p < 0.05), clinical teaching roles (55% men agreed vs. 28% women, p < 0.05), or facilitating educational conferences (45% men agreed vs. 28% women, p = 0.074). In 2017, the internal medicine department at our institution comprised 815 faculty members, 473 men (58%) and 342 women (42%). At that time, women faculty held 5% of senior departmental leadership positions and 21% of educational leadership positions. During the year preceding survey distribution, women faculty attended on internal medicine inpatient wards for 33% of the total number of weeks, staffed 20% of morning reports, and facilitated 28% of noon conferences. DISCUSSION: Women residents in our internal medicine training program perceived a gender disparity among faculty in leadership and educational positions to a greater extent than male residents. The perception of women trainees was accurate. In addition to disproportionate underrepresentation in leadership positions, women faculty were underrepresented in prominent educational positions, including attending on inpatient services and serving as discussants at educational conferences.Item type:Publication, Impact of a Women-focused Professional Organization on Academic Retention and Advancement: Perceptions From a Qualitative Study Open PDF(2019) ;Lin, Michelle P. ;Lall, Michelle D. ;Samuels-Kalow, Margaret ;Das, DevjaniLinden, Judith A.OBJECTIVES: Organizations to promote career networking and mentorship among women are recommended as a best practice to support the recruitment and retention of women physicians; however, the impact of such organizations is unknown. Our primary objective is to describe the impact of a national woman-focused organization for academic emergency physicians on retention and advancement. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews of past and present organization leaders, as well as members at varying stages in their careers. Physicians with experience in qualitative methods conducted interviews and coded all transcripts using inductive content analysis techniques. Themes were reviewed and discussed to ensure consensus. RESULTS: We performed 17 interviews lasting 20 to 30 minutes each, resulting in 476 total minutes of transcript. Participants represented varying stages of career experience, ranging from 2 to 35 years since residency completion (median = 9.5 years). Median years of participation in the woman-focused organization was 10 years. Over half (53%) of participants were past presidents of the organization. The dominant themes encompassed facilitating academic advancement through scholarly productivity, leadership experiences, awards, and promotions; mentorship and sponsorship; peer support and collaborations; reduced professional isolation; and initiatives to address systemic gender inequities and challenges, including strategies to navigate bias, promote pay equity, and advocate for family-friendly workplace policies. DISCUSSION: Active participation in a woman-focused professional organization enhances members' career retention and advancement by creating opportunities and relationships that facilitate leadership, enabling scholarly work to advance equity and inclusion, and cultivating a sense of belonging. While challenges and barriers persist, the myriad benefits of a women-focused professional organization reported by members and leaders represent important steps toward greater equity for women and other underrepresented groups in academic medicine.Item type:Publication, Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis Open PDF(2021) ;Li, Ben ;Jacob-Brassard, Jean ;Dossa, Fahima ;Salata, KonradKishibe, TerukoOBJECTIVE: Many studies have analysed gender bias in academic medicine; however, no comprehensive synthesis of the literature has been performed. We conducted a pooled analysis of the difference in the proportion of men versus women with full professorship among academic physicians. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Education Resources Information Center and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 3 July 2020. STUDY SELECTION: All original studies reporting faculty rank stratified by gender worldwide were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study screening, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. RESULTS: Our search yielded 5897 articles. 218 studies were included with 991 207 academic physician data points. Men were 2.77 times more likely to be full professors (182 271/643 790 men vs 30 349/251 501 women, OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.57 to 2.98). Although men practised for longer (median 18 vs 12 years, p<0.00002), the gender gap remained after pooling seven studies that adjusted for factors including time in practice, specialty, publications, h-index, additional PhD and institution (adjusted OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.20). Meta-regression by data collection year demonstrated improvement over time (p=0.0011); however, subgroup analysis showed that gender disparities remain significant in the 2010-2020 decade (OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.48 to 2.80). The gender gap was present across all specialties and both within and outside of North America. Men published more papers (mean difference 17.2, 95% CI 14.7 to 19.7), earned higher salaries (mean difference $33 256, 95% CI $25 969 to $40 542) and were more likely to be departmental chairs (OR 2.61, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.12). CONCLUSIONS: Gender inequity in academic medicine exists across all specialties, geographical regions and multiple measures of success, including academic rank, publications, salary and leadership. Men are more likely than women to be full professors after controlling for experience, academic productivity and specialty. Although there has been some improvement over time, the gender disparity in faculty rank persists. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020197414.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »