PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.NeurologySubject: search.filters.subject.Cross-Sectional Studies

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • 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 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,
    Gender Inequality in Leadership Positions in Neurology and Neurosurgery Journals and Societies Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Apaydin, Aydin Sinan
    ;
    Emekli, Inci
    OBJECTIVE: Gender inequalities persist in several areas of medicine, despite the growing number of female doctors and medical students. In this study, we aimed to reveal the gender inequality in the top journals' editorial boards and national societies' leadership positions in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. METHOD: This is a cross-sectional study that uses public information accessed through the internet via journals' and academic societies' public websites. The medical journals are selected and included according to their h5-index in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. We evaluated the gender composition of the editorial boards and academic societies' leadership positions. RESULTS: The female editorial board member ratio was 44.0% in the top 10 neurology journals. However, this ratio was significantly decreased to 29.7% in the other journals(P < 0.001). The top 10 neurosurgery journals had a female editorial board member ratio of 13.7%. This ratio was significantly decreased to 5.3% in the other 10 journals with lower h5-index(P < 0.001). A significantly lower number of female individuals are present in the editorial boards of the neurosurgery journals than in neurology(P < 0.001). The female president or delegate ratio was 19.3% in the World Federation of Neurology-affiliated countries, and it was 4% in the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies-affiliated countries. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there is a significant gender inequality among editorial board members. The position of neurosurgical societies and journals is far different than the field of neurology. Furthermore, these findings should be evaluated as a continuum of the gender inequality in the professional societies' executive boards and delegates representing the national academical community.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The role of gender in academic productivity, impact, and leadership among academic spine surgeons Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Agaronnik, Nicole
    ;
    Xiong, Grace X.
    ;
    Uzosike, Akachimere
    ;
    Crawford, Alexander M.
    ;
    Lightsey, Harry M.
    BACKGROUND/CONTEXT: Women represent a small minority of practicing orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons, with spine surgery having a disproportionately low representation relative to other subspecialties. Previous efforts have attempted to characterize gender patterns in authorship amongst select spine journals. However, no study to our knowledge has done a comprehensive assessment of the influence of gender on academic productivity, impact, and leadership amongst academic spine faculty. PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of gender on academic productivity, promotion to leadership positions, and career advancement among academic spine faculty in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Academic spine faculty associated with orthopedic residency, North American Spine Society spine fellowship programs, and American Association of Neurological Surgeons spine fellowship programs. OUTCOME MEASURES: Academic productivity as measured by publications counts, h-index, authorship ranking as well as academic rank and leadership roles METHODS: We identified all spine faculty across orthopedic residency, orthopedic spine fellowship, and neurosurgical spine fellowship programs in the United States, and abstracted academic performance characteristics, cumulative h-index, and complete publication records for each individual faculty member. Proportions of men and women by specialty, academic rank, and leadership were compared with Fisher's exact testing, and comparison of mean h-index and publication counts compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum testing. Adjusted analyses on publication count and h-index were achieved with poisson regression analysis with gender as the primary predictor adjusting for specialty, degrees, academic rank, and seniority based on time since fellowship completion. RESULTS: The representation of women among spine faculty associated with orthopedic residency and North American Spine Society spine fellowship programs was 5.6%. On average, women had 40% fewer total publications (p=.025), h-indices approximately 5 units lower than men (p=.006), 40% fewer total high-impact publications (p=.030), half the senior author publications (p=.005), and half the high-impact senior author publications (p=.007) compared to men. After adjusting for seniority and academic rank, the number of publications in high impact journals no longer differed between men and women, although differences persisted for total publication count and the h-index. Men were significantly more likely to occupy higher academic ranks, with 25.6% of men and 9.5% of women holding the rank of full professor (p=.031), although there was no significant difference in the rate of appointment to leadership positions. Similar findings were encountered among American Association of Neurological Surgeons spine fellowship faculty. CONCLUSIONS: The present study details the low rate of women in academic spine surgery. Furthermore, gender disparities exist in publication volume, impact, and h-indices. A much lower proportion of women hold higher-ranking academic positions compared to men, though appointment to leadership positions was similar between genders. Differences in seniority and publication metrics may in part be due to the relatively younger cohort of women faculty. These findings underscore the need for active investment in diversity and pipeline efforts that facilitate recruitment and support academic productivity of women in spine surgery.