PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.PediatricsViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does academic authorship reflect gender bias in pediatric surgery? An analysis of the Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2007–2017 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Marrone, Alexandra F.
    ;
    Berman, Loren
    ;
    Brandt, Mary L.
    ;
    Rothstein, David H.
    Background Gender representation in academic publications has been considered a surrogate for gender equity in medicine, although this concept has not been evaluated in pediatric surgery. Methods First and last author genders for Journal of Pediatric Surgery articles from United States and/or Canadian institutions (2007, 2012, 2017) were identified. These data were compared to gender proportions for applicants to and matriculants in pediatric surgery fellowships as well as among American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) members. Results Authorship gender was identified for 632/640 primary articles (98.8%). From 2007 to 2017, the proportion of women as first authors increased from 33.0% to 53.9% (p < 0.001) and as last authors from 16.2% to 26.4% (p = 0.01). The proportion of women fellowship applicants rose from 35.9% to 57.6% (p < 0.001); among those who successfully matched the rise was nonlinear (20.5%–34.0%, p = 0.16). APSA junior and senior women membership proportions rose during the study period [from 28.1% to 43.4% (p = 0.06 for linear trend) and 17.9% to 24.4% (p = 0.005 for linear trend), respectively]. Conclusions Over the past decade, the overall proportion of women authors in a leading academic pediatric surgery journal has increased significantly, although representation among last authors remains disproportionately low. The numbers of women applicants to pediatric surgery fellowship increased but there was not a concordant rise in the number of women accepted into training positions. Type of study Bibliometric analysis. Level of evidence n/a
  • Item type:Publication,
    Declining racial and ethnic representation in clinical academic medicine: A longitudinal study of 16 US medical specialties Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Lett, Elle
    ;
    Orji, Whitney U.
    ;
    Sebro, Ronnie
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in racial, ethnic, and sex representation at US medical schools across 16 specialties: internal medicine, pediatrics, surgery, psychiatry, radiology, anesthesiology, obstetrics and gynecology, neurology, family practice, pathology, emergency medicine, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and dermatology. Using a novel, Census-derived statistical measure of diversity, the S-score, we quantified the degree of underrepresentation for racial minority groups and female faculty by rank for assistant, associate, and full professors from 1990-2016. METHODS: This longitudinal study of faculty diversity uses data obtained from the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Roster from US allopathic medical schools. The proportion of professors of racial minority groups and female faculty by rank was compared to the US population based on data from the US Census Bureau. The Roster includes data on 52,939 clinical medical faculty in 1990, and 129,545 in 2016, at the assistant professor level or higher. The primary measure used in this study was the S-score, a measure of representation based on the probability of the observed frequency of faculty from a racial/ethnic group and sex, given the racial and ethnic distribution of the US. Pearson correlations and 95% confidence intervals for S-score with time were used to measure trends. RESULTS: Blacks and Hispanics showed statistically significant trends (p<0.05) towards increasing underrepresentation in most specialties and are more underrepresented in 2016 than in 1990 across all ranks and specialties analyzed, except for Black females in obstetrics & gynecology. White females were also underrepresented in many specialties and in a subset of specialties trended toward greater underrepresentation. CONCLUSIONS: Current efforts to improve faculty diversity are inadequate in generating an academic physician workforce that represents the diversity of the US. More aggressive measures for faculty recruitment, retention, and promotion are necessary to reach equity in academia and healthcare.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The "gender gap" in authorship of academic medical literature--a 35-year perspective Open PDF 
    (2006)
    Jagsi, Reshma
    ;
    Guancial, Elizabeth A.
    ;
    Worobey, Cynthia Cooper
    ;
    Henault, Lori E.
    ;
    Chang, Yuchiao
    BACKGROUND: Participation of women in the medical profession has increased during the past four decades, but issues of concern persist regarding disparities between the sexes in academic medicine. Advancement is largely driven by peer-reviewed original research, so we sought to determine the representation of female physician-investigators among the authors of selected publications during the past 35 years. METHODS: Original articles from six prominent medical journals--the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the Annals of Internal Medicine (Ann Intern Med), the Annals of Surgery (Ann Surg), Obstetrics & Gynecology (Obstet Gynecol), and the Journal of Pediatrics (J Pediatr)--were categorized according to the sex of both the first and the senior (last listed) author. Sex was also determined for the authors of guest editorials in NEJM and JAMA. Data were collected for the years 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2004. The analysis was restricted to authors from U.S. institutions holding M.D. degrees. RESULTS: The sex was determined for 98.5 percent of the 7249 U.S. authors of original research with M.D. degrees. The proportion of first authors who were women increased from 5.9 percent in 1970 to 29.3 percent in 2004 (P<0.001), and the proportion of senior authors who were women increased from 3.7 percent to 19.3 percent (P<0.001) during the same period. The proportion of authors who were women increased most sharply in Obstet Gynecol (from 6.7 percent of first authors and 6.8 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 40.7 percent of first authors and 28.0 percent of senior authors in 2004) and J Pediatr (from 15.0 percent of first authors and 4.3 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 38.9 percent of first authors and 38.0 percent of senior authors in 2004) and remained low in Ann Surg (from 2.3 percent of first authors and 0.7 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 16.7 percent of first authors and 6.7 percent of senior authors in 2004). In 2004, 11.4 percent of the authors of guest editorials in NEJM and 18.8 percent of the authors of guest editorials in JAMA were women. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past four decades, the proportion of women among both first and senior physician-authors of original research in the United States has significantly increased. Nevertheless, women still compose a minority of the authors of original research and guest editorials in the journals studied.
  • 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,
    Gender Difference in Teaching Evaluation Scores of Pediatric Faculty Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Tiedt, Kristin
    ;
    Webber, Sarah
    ;
    Babal, Jessica
    ;
    Nackers, Kirstin A. M.
    ;
    Allen, Ann
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate associations between faculty gender and milestone-based teaching assessment scores assigned by residents. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of milestone-based clinical teaching assessments of pediatric faculty completed by pediatric residents at a mid-sized residency program from July 2016 to June 2019. Assessments included 3 domains (Clinical Interactions, Teaching Skills, Role Modeling/Professionalism) comprised of a total of 11 sub-competency items. We used multilevel logistic regression accounting for repeat measures and clustering to evaluate associations between faculty gender and assessment scores in the 1) top quartile, 2) bottom quartile, or 3) top-box (highest score). Findings were adjusted for faculty rank and academic track, and resident year and gender. RESULTS: Over 3 years, 2889 assessments of 104 faculty were performed by 91 residents. Between assessments of women and men faculty, there were no significant differences in the odds of receiving a score in the top quartile for the 3 domains (Clinical aOR 0.99, P = .86; Teaching aOR 0.99, P = .93; Role Modeling aOR 0.87, P = .089). However, assessments of women were more likely to receive a score in the bottom quartile in both Teaching (aOR 1.23, P = .019) and Role Modeling (aOR 1.26, P = .008). Assessments of women also had lower odds of receiving the highest score in 6 of 11 sub-competencies. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that gender bias may play a role in resident assessments of pediatric faculty. Future studies are needed to determine if findings are replicated in other settings and to identify opportunities to reduce the gender gap in pediatric academic medicine.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender distribution in emergency medicine journals: editorial board memberships in top-ranked academic journals Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Ravioli, Svenja
    ;
    Rupp, Adrienne
    ;
    Exadaktylos, Aristomenis K.
    ;
    Lindner, Gregor
    Objective  Despite an established gender gap in academic medicine, evidence on gender diversity in emergency medicine is scarce. In the present study, gender distribution of editorial boards and among editors-in-chief of 31 emergency medicine journals was investigated in 2020/2021 and compared to 2015 and 2010. Additionally, gender distribution in editorial boards of emergency medicine journals was compared to editorial boards in five different medical specialties. Methods  In this cross-sectional analysis, gender of editorial board members and editors-in-chief of journals ranked in the Clarivate Analytics ‘Journal Citation Report’ (JCR) of 2019 in the sections ‘Emergency Medicine’, ‘Medicine General and Internal’, ‘Surgery’, ‘Obstetrics and Gynecology’, ‘Pediatrics’ and ‘Orthopedics’ were analyzed. Results  In the investigated 31 emergency medicine journals, three out of 35 editors-in-chief (9%) and 299 out of 1810 editorial board members (17%) were women in 2020/2021. In 2015 and 2010, two editors-in-chief were women (13% vs. 15%). In 2015, 19% of editorial board members were women and in 2010 it was 18%, respectively. There was no significant difference in gender distribution among editors-in-chief and editorial board members comparing 2020/2021 with 2015 and 2010 (P = 0.76 vs. P = 0.40, respectively). There was a lower percentage of women in editorial boards of emergency medicine journals compared to the top five JCR-ranked journals in the categories ‘Medicine General and Internal’, ‘Surgery’, ‘Gynecology and Obstetrics’ and ‘Pediatrics’. Conclusion  The gender gap in editorial boards and among editors-in-chief of emergency medicine journals seems to be consistent for the last 10 years. Gender disparity appears to be substantial in academic emergency medicine: The percentage of women in emergency medicine editorial boards was lower compared to editorial boards of four other medical specialties.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences Among Academic Pediatric Radiology Faculty in the United States and Canada Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Counter, William B.
    ;
    Khurshid, Kiran
    ;
    Jalal, Sabeena
    ;
    Castillo, Mauricio
    ;
    White, Ammie M.
    OBJECTIVE: It is currently unknown whether efforts in recent years to create equal opportunities for female faculty in academic medicine have succeeded. We looked at faculty members in academic pediatric radiology departments across the United States and Canada to assess for evidence of gender disparities and differences in academic performance between males and females. METHODS: The analysis included diagnostic radiology programs across the United States and Canada, as specified by the American Medical Association's Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA Online) and the Canadian Resident Matching Service website. The Scopus database was used to retrieve the H-index, number of publications, and number of citations for each faculty member. We examined the distribution of male and female faculty members across geographical regions, academic ranks, and leadership roles. Academic performance was also compared. RESULTS: Across all regions and academic ranks, disparities exist between the number of male and female faculty members. The greatest disparity was found amongst the professor rank, where more than 70% of positions were occupied by males. Female professors were found to demonstrate similar levels of academic performance compared to their male counterparts, although this parity was not observed amongst assistant and associate professors. CONCLUSION: Women occupied almost half (46.6%) of the total academic pediatric radiology workforce, despite having been previously shown to make up only 21% of radiologists. However, gender disparities currently exist among academic pediatric radiology faculty, with a significantly higher percentage of men in pediatric radiology faculty positions. Women, however, currently occupy a greater percentage of leadership positions compared to men, even though the majority of senior academic ranks are held by men.