PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.NeurologySubject: search.filters.subject.Adult

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    The workplace culture, mental health and wellbeing of early- and mid-career health academics: a cross-sectional analysis Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Marck, Claudia H.
    ;
    Ayton, Darshini
    ;
    Steward, Trevor
    ;
    Koay, Hui-Fern
    ;
    Wiley, Joshua F.
    There are reports of poor working conditions for early and mid-career academics (EMCAs) in universities, however, empirical data using validated tools are scarce. We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey using validated tools to assess workplace satisfaction, exposure to workplace abuse, and mental health. Participants included employees of medical and health faculties of two of the largest Australian universities, surveyed between October 2020 and January 2021.Overall, 284 participants responded. Many reported job insecurity: half (50.7%) working on contracts with less than one remaining year. Workloads were considerable, with 89.5% of participants working overtime and 54.8% reporting burnout. Workplace abuse in the forms of bullying (46.6%), sexual harassment (25.3%), sexism (49.8%) and racism (22.5%) were commonly reported. Clinically significant symptoms of depression (28.0%), anxiety (21.7%) and suicidal ideation or self-harm (13.6%) were reported; with a higher prevalence among those working more overtime, and those exposed to workplace abuse. Priorities include providing a stable and safe workplace, increasing accountability and transparency in addressing workplace abuse, and supporting professional development.In summary, EMCAs in our study were commonly exposed to precarious employment conditions and workplace abuse. Our findings provide empirical evidence on where universities and funding bodies should direct resources and change organisational risk factors, to improve workplace culture.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in industry compensation and research payments among neurointerventional surgeons in the USA Open PDF 
    (BMJ Publishing Group, 2023)
    Kyarunts, M.
    ;
    Michaelcheck, C.E.
    ;
    Kobeissi, H.
    ;
    Kallmes, D.F.
    ;
    Agid, R.
    Background: The purpose of this study is to examine the presence of gender disparity represented by industry payments and research funding within the field of interventional neuroradiology. Methods: Payment information was collected using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payment database for the year 2019. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyze differences in annual compensation based on sex in $US, while controlling for geographic factors, academic rank, and h-index. A sample t-test was performed to look at gender differences in h-indexes. Results: The study cohort was comprised of 893 interventional neuroradiologists, 73 (8.2%) of which were female. Of the $48889.20 in mean annual payments reported in the database, $5847.13 (11.2%) went to female interventional neuroradiologists (P<0.05). The significant difference in compensation between male and female neuroradiologists was evident after controlling for state-level variance and academic position. There was a statistically significant difference in total reimbursement (P<0.001), research (P<0.001), consulting (P<0.04), food and beverage (P<0.02), and compensation for services other than consulting between males and females (P<0.02). A statistically significant difference was found for h-index based on gender (males=16.7, females=10.1; P<0.001). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that in the field of interventional neuroradiology, females receive less research funding and private industry compensation, have lower h-indexes, and are less likely to occupy the highest academic positions. The difference in funding did not differ when accounting for geographic state of practice and academic rank. Future studies should work to identify potential contributory factors of these trends. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex Differences in Academic Productivity Across Academic Ranks and Specialties in Academic Medicine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Ha, Giang L.
    ;
    Lehrer, Eric J.
    ;
    Wang, Ming
    ;
    Holliday, Emma
    ;
    Jagsi, Reshma
    Importance: Despite equal numbers of men and women entering medical school, women are underrepresented in the upper echelons of academic medicine and receive less compensation and research funding. Citation-related publication productivity metrics, such as the h-index, are increasingly used for hiring, salary, grants, retention, promotion, and tenure decisions. Exploring sex differences in these metrics across academic medicine provides deeper insight into why differences are observed in career outcomes. Objective: To systematically examine the available literature on sex differences in h-index of academic faculty physicians across all medical specialties and all levels of academic rank. Data Sources: Medical literature with the term h-index found in PubMed and published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018, was used. Study Selection: A PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes), PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses), and MOOSE (Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) selection protocol was used to find observational studies that published h-indexes for faculty physicians that were stratified by sex. Studies were excluded if they were review articles, retracted, or unavailable online. Ultimately, 14 of 786 studies (1.78%) met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data from 9 studies across 16 specialties were examined using weighted random-effects meta-analyses. Five studies were excluded because of overlapping specialties with another study or because they were missing appropriate statistics for the meta-analysis. Four of these studies were included in qualitative synthesis to bring the total to 13 studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcome was the h-index. Results: The meta-analysis included 10 665 North American unique academic physicians across 9 different studies from the years 2009 to 2018. Of the 10 665 physicians, 2655 (24.89%) were women. Summary effect sizes for mean h-indexes of men and women and mean h-index difference between men and women were determined for all faculty physicians and at each academic rank. Overall, female faculty had lower h-indexes than male faculty (mean difference, -4.09; 95% CI, -5.44 to -2.73; P < .001). When adjusting for academic rank, female faculty still had lower h-indexes than male faculty at the ranks of assistant professor (mean difference, -1.3; 95% CI, -1.90 to -0.72; P < .001), associate professor (mean difference, -2.09; 95% CI, -3.40 to -0.78; P = .002), and professor (mean difference, -3.41; 95% CI, -6.24 to -0.58; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, women had lower h-indexes than men across most specialties and at all academic ranks, but it is unclear why these differences exist. These findings suggest that future investigation should be conducted regarding the causes of lower h-indexes in women and that interventions should be developed to provide a more equitable environment for all physicians regardless of sex.
  • Item type:Publication,
    A Qualitative Study of Facilitators, Barriers, and Gender Disparities in Academic Neurology Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Dy-Hollins, Marisela E.
    ;
    Hall, Deborah A.
    ;
    Cahill, Carolyn M.
    ;
    Meyer, Ana-Claire L.
    ;
    Peltier, Amanda C.
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the challenges and facilitators of a successful academic neurology research career broadly and to identify gender-based disparities specifically. METHODS: In 2019, participants self-identifying as researchers, preregistered for the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Annual Meeting, ≥7 years out of residency, and authors of ≥1 AAN meeting abstract submission (2006-2009) were selected to participate in the qualitative study (purposeful sampling strategy). To increase diversity, 15 participants were invited by members involved in the AAN until interviews were complete. The AAN at the time of the study asked gender using sex-based terms. Participants were asked predetermined and open-ended questions. Themes were generated using a flexible coding methodology. RESULTS: Sixty neurologists (31 women, 29 men) participated in the focus groups and individual interviews. Six predetermined domains relevant to a successful neurology research career were explored: success definitions, facilitators, barriers, biases and harassment, mitigation strategies, and participant recommendations. Gender-based differences were noted during discussions focused on barriers and biases and harassment. Lack of women mentors, under-representation of women in senior faculty positions, and competing responsibilities when children are young were identified as barriers to women's success. Participants acknowledged that known gender disparities in compensation, academic promotion, and publications disproportionately affect women. Women shared more experiences of bias and harassment. Some men felt that gender-based biases were minimal to nonexistent. Participants shared their recommendations on ways to mitigate gender disparities and pursue a neurology research career. Leadership involvement locally and nationally in advocating and implementing change outside academic institutions was also mentioned as being valuable. DISCUSSION: Our findings may not be generalizable to academic neurologists outside the United States. Women academic neurology researchers experienced disparities across several domains affecting success: lower compensation, fewer women mentors, bias, and harassment. Women are less likely to be promoted, have less research success, and job satisfaction. Shared experiences of bias and harassment among women neurology researchers indicate continuing opportunity for education among departments and colleagues for preventive measures. These qualitative results indicate gender disparities among US-based neurology researchers and highlight the importance of the continued need to work toward equality and equity in disparate gender-related issues in the careers of neurology researchers.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in academic rank achievement in neurosurgery: A critical assessment Open PDF 
    (American Association of Neurological Surgeons, 2020)
    Dossani, R.H.
    ;
    Terrell, D.
    ;
    Kosty, J.A.
    ;
    Ross, R.C.
    ;
    Demand, A.
    OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate whether there are disparities in academic rank and promotion between men and women neurosurgeons. METHODS The profiles of faculty members from 50 academic neurosurgery programs were reviewed to identify years in practice, number of PubMed-indexed publications, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) attainment, and academic rank. The number of publications at each academic rank was compared between men and women after controlling for years in practice by using a negative binomial regression model. The relationship between gender and each academic rank was also determined after controlling for clustering at the institutional level, years in practice, and number of publications. RESULTS Of 841 faculty members identified, 761 (90%) were men (p = 0.0001). Women represented 12% of the assistant and associate professors but only 4% of the full professors. Men and women did not differ in terms of the percentage holding a PhD, years in practice, or number of publications at any academic rank. After controlling for years in practice and clustering at the facility level, the authors found that men were twice as likely as women to be named full professor (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.09-4.44, p = 0.03). However, when institution, years in practice attainment, h-index, and number of publications were considered, men and women were equally likely to attain full professorship (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.42-1.93). CONCLUSIONS Data analysis of the top neurosurgery programs suggests that although there are fewer women than men holding positions in academic neurosurgery, faculty rank attainment does not seem to be influenced by gender. © AANS 2020.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in multiple sclerosis research and leadership: A Colombian perspective Open PDF 
    (Frontiers Media S. A., 2022)
    Casallas-Vanegas, A.
    ;
    Guío-Sánchez, C.
    ;
    Reyes-Mantilla, M.I.
    ;
    Restrepo-Aristizábal, C.
    ;
    Navas-Granados, A.
    Background: The neurological academic field is an illustrative example of persistent gender-related disparities reflected in compensation, funding, leadership, promotion, publishing, and recognition. Several studies indicate that neurology is one of the most underrepresented specialties with female physicians as first authors, but also has one of the highest gender payment gaps. Neglecting the role of women in academic leadership positions hinders the visibility and recognition of research and leadership in multiple sclerosis (MS). Increasing diversity within academia has positive effects, such as widening focus and expanding the plurality of research outputs. The gender gap and visibility of female MS clinicians and researchers remains an unexplored research topic in our country despite the rising number of female neurologists. Objective: This study aims to establish the gender distribution between researchers and clinical neurologists in multiple sclerosis in Colombia and raise awareness about gender disparities in this area. Methods: We applied a cross-sectional survey study of Colombian neurologists and neurology residents currently members of the Colombian Neurology Association. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were used for quantitative variables and frequency for qualitative variables. To evaluate the influence of gender, logarithmic regression was used. Data were analyzed in SPSS 26. Results: A total of 201 participants agreed to complete the survey, most of whom were female (n = 135, 67.2%). All the Colombian regions were represented in the survey. Of those surveyed, 31.5% (n = 64) had an interest in demyelinating diseases and MS, of which 46.8% (n = 30) were female. Of the women with MS training, only 50% (n =5) had more than three publications as the first author of a scientific article compared to men (n = 5, 83%). After adjusting the number of publications by gender, there were no significant differences between men and women (median 2.0[2, 1.21] vs. 2[2, 0.5], p = 0.904). However, only 16.6% (n = 5) of women had a visible academic, leadership, or teaching position compared with men 75.7% (n = 25). When adjusting the salary income by gender, we found a statistically significant difference between women and men (median 2.0 [5, 1.47] vs. 3 [5, 1.65], p = 0.006). Women in MS earned between USD 2,500 and 3,800 per month; while men earned between USD 3,800 to 5,070. Conclusion: Despite a higher number of female neurologists trained in MS in Colombia, our data suggest considerable differences and gender gaps with regard to diverse opportunities at the academic, salary promotion, leadership, teaching, and recognition levels between male and female MS neurologists. Copyright © 2022 Casallas-Vanegas, Guío-Sánchez, Reyes-Mantilla, Restrepo-Aristizábal, Navas-Granados, Guerrero-Gómez and Zuluaga.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Addressing the Gender Gap in Research: Insights from a Women in Neuroscience Conference Open PDF 
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2021)
    Berryhill, M.E.
    ;
    Desrochers, T.M.
    There has been growing interest in quantifying the proportion of women participating in scientific conferences, publications, and committees. Numbers reveal persistent disparities, but offer few cures to the root causes of the gender gaps in research. Toward remediation, we outline five lessons learned through organizing two conferences for Women in Neuroscience (WiN). These recommendations build on participants’ comments, and aim to better support women in their scientific paths and help provide equal opportunity. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd