PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
27 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Progress toward gender equity in leadership and representation in academic pediatric ophthalmology Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2025-10) ;Bicknell, Brenton T. ;Rudd Zhong Manis, Josephine ;Chishom, Haley ;Heo, YejinDzubinski, LanceBACKGROUND: Gender representation in academic pediatric ophthalmology has shifted significantly in recent decades, with increasing female participation. This study examines academic rank, leadership roles, and research productivity as a function of gender. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed publicly available data from 126 US academic ophthalmology programs listed in the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) during August 2024. Data collected from institutional websites identified 451 fellowship-trained pediatric ophthalmologists. Variables included gender, fellowship graduation year, academic rank, leadership roles (eg, department chair, fellowship director, program director), and research productivity metrics (publications, citations, h-index). Statistical comparisons used Pearson's χ2 test, the Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U or t tests, where appropriate, with significance defined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Women now account for 55.9% (252/451) of academic pediatric ophthalmologists. Among those who completed fellowships before 2000, males constitute a larger proportion than females (69.7% vs 30.3%); since 2000, females comprise a greater share of fellowship graduates (65.3% vs 34.7% [P < 0.01]). Men more frequently serve as full professors (40.9% vs 18.0%, P <0.01]) and department chairs (6.5% vs 2.0% [P = 0.02]; women, more often as assistant professors (54.5% vs 40.1% [P = 0.01]) and program directors (3.6% vs 0.5% [P = 0.03]). Research productivity and academic rank are similar between genders in post-2000 graduates. CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparities persist in senior roles, but recent cohorts of currently practicing faculty demonstrate similar levels of academic rank and research productivity. Women now account for 55.9% of academic pediatric ophthalmologists and 65.3% of post-2000 graduates.Item type:Publication, A Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on the Prevalence of Chronic Pain in Children and Adolescents From 2009 to 2023 Open PDF(Wiley, 2025-08-18) ;Dol, Justine ;Chambers, Christine T. ;Parker, Jennifer A. ;Tutelman, Perri R.Cormier, BrittanyABSTRACT Bibliometric reviews explore patterns in publications in a given research area by exploring trends over time and the contributions by citations, such as relationships between authors and publications. Despite "chronic pain" being the second most common keyword in pain research, no bibliometric reviews have focused on publication trends related to the prevalence of chronic pain in children and adolescents. A bibliometric analysis was conducted with articles included in a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of pediatric chronic pain to identify the recent trajectory of the field and guide future directions. Publication bibliometrics data from the articles were extracted and analyzed (e.g., gender of authors, citation counts, and countries) and was visualized in VOSViewer. Among 119 studies, the number of publications per year ranged from 4 (2023) to 11 (2014, 2021) with an average of 8/year. Articles were cited on average 36.6 times (SD = 51.7, range 0-380) with 5058 unique citations. There were 74 different journals represented, with most publishing only 1 article (n = 52, 70%). Seventy countries were represented in prevalence data, 78% from high-income countries; fifteen (21.4%) had only one data point, primarily from low- and lower-middle income countries. There were 109 different corresponding authors, with only 1 corresponding author who had more than 2 published articles. There was relative gender equity in terms of first and corresponding author. There was little to no collaboration between author groups identified. Despite a steady number of articles published over the 14-year period, the literature on the prevalence of pediatric chronic pain appears fragmented with articles published in a wide variety of journals. Prevalence data from low- and lower-middle-income countries were under-represented. Future work should focus on expanding evidence in underrepresented areas and greater collaboration among research groups to collect prevalence data in geographical areas where data gaps exist.Item type:Publication, Perspectives and needs of neonatology division directors regarding gender equity Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2024-10-30) ;Machut, Kerri Z. ;Owens, Lisa ;Gadek, Lauren ;Kataria-Hale, JasmeetLingappan, KrithikaGender inequities in pediatrics are extensively documented despite women predominating the workforce. As a landscape assessment of gender equity in university-based neonatology divisions in the United States, we collected gender equity measures from academic neonatology division directors; 83% (n = 106) participated. The majority recognized addressing gender inequity was a middle-to-top priority, though they reported minimal gender inequities in their division. Most division directors are men and a higher proportion of full professors are men, but they reported minimal differences in time to promotion, leadership positions, and awards. Half of centers analyzed compensation by gender; all reported no gender difference. The existence of gender-equity-promoting strategies was variable and uncertain by many directors. They reported lack of bandwidth, personnel, and resources as the largest barriers to tracking and addressing gender inequities. These perceived minimal gender inequities diverge from published objective data and highlight the need to track and report metrics accurately and systematically.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/aItem 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, RonnieOBJECTIVE: 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, Gender Disparity in Pediatric Surgery: An Evaluation of Pediatric Surgery Conference Participation Open PDF(2023) ;Lee, SY ;Mor, S ;Lazar, SV ;Hassan, ASFarmer, DLBackground: Leadership in academic conferences is an important factor for academic advancement. Underrepresentation of women in academic surgical conferences has been demonstrated in other subspecialties, but it has not been well-studied in pediatric surgery. Methods: This retrospective descriptive study analyzes conference participation at 2 national pediatric surgery annual conference programs from 2003 to 2022. Moderator, speakers, and research presenter sex was collected. The primary outcome was the proportion of female participants in each of these roles. Mann-Kendall trend test was conducted to assess for significance. Results: Across 29 meetings, a total of 523 sessions were examined. Overall, female participation in all roles increased from 2003 to 2022. There were statistically positive trends of female participation in leadership roles as moderator (p = 0.003) and speaker (p = 0.01), with moderator role demonstrating the largest proportional female increase over time - with a 7-fold increase from 7.1% in 2003 to 50.0% in 2022. There was also a significant increasing trend in female participation as research presenters (p < 0.01) from 25.4% to 46.4%. Conclusion: Gender representation in pediatric surgery conferences has improved over the last two decades. Women now represent approximately half of all participatory roles, and efforts to continue providing equal opportunities for women at pediatric surgery academic conferences should continue. Level of evidence: N/A. Type of study: Retrospective Descriptive. (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Item type:Publication, Gender Distribution of Scholarship and Measures of National Recognition in Hospital Medicine Open PDF(2022) ;Kim, Juliann L. ;Allan, Jessica M. ;Fromme, H. Barrett ;Forster, Catherine S.Shaughnessy, ErinOBJECTIVE: Our specific aim was to assess the gender distribution of aspects of scholarly productivity and professional standing for pediatric hospital medicine over a 5-year period. We also evaluated for correlation between the makeup of editorial boards, conference planning committees, and chosen content. METHODS: We reviewed scholarly publications, presentations, editorial boards, planning committees, awardees, and society leadership in pediatric hospital medicine from 2015 to 2019 and determined gender using published methods to assess for differences between observed proportions of women authors and presenters and the proportion of women in the field. RESULTS: The field of pediatric hospital medicine at large is 69% women (95% confidence internal [CI] 68%-71%), and an estimated 57% of senior members are women (95% CI 54%-60%). We evaluated 570 original science manuscripts and found 67% (95% CI 63%-71%) women first authors and 49% (95% CI 44%-53%) women senior authors. We evaluated 1093 presentations at national conferences and found 69% (95% CI 65%-72%) women presenters of submitted content and 44% (95% CI 37%-51%) women presenters of invited content. Senior authorship and invited speaking engagements demonstrated disproportionately low representation of women when compared with senior members of the field (senior authorship, P = .002; invited presenters, P < .001). Strong positive correlation between gender composition of conference planning committees and selected content was also noted (r = 0.94). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated representative gender distribution for some aspects of scholarly productivity in pediatric hospital medicine; however, a lack of gender parity exists in senior roles.Item type:Publication, Pre- and post-COVID-19 gender trends in authorship for paediatric radiology articles worldwide: a systematic review Open PDF(2024) ;Kamran, Rakhshan ;Jackman, Liam ;Chan, Cynthia ;Lee, Ann C.Kamran, AleezaBACKGROUND: Gender inequalities in academic medicine persist despite progress over the past decade. Evidence-based targeted interventions are needed to reduce gender inequalities. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on gender trends in authorship of paediatric radiology research worldwide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospectively registered, PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2018, to May 29, 2023, with no restrictions on country of origin. Screening and data extraction occurred independently and in duplicate. Gender of first, last, and corresponding authors were determined using an artificial intelligence-powered, validated, multinational database ( www.genderize.io ). Two time periods were categorised according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering: pre-COVID (prior to March 2020) and peak and post-COVID (March 2020 onwards). One-sample binomial testing was used to analyse proportion of authorship based on gender. Categorical variables were described as frequencies and percentages, and compared using testing chi-square or Fisher exact testing, with a threshold of P<0.05 representing statistical significance. RESULTS: In total, 922 articles were included with 39 countries represented. A statistically significant difference in authorship based on gender persisted during the peak and post-COVID time period (March 2020 onwards) where women represented a statistically significant lower proportion of last (35.5%) and corresponding (42.7%) authors (P<0.001, P=0.001, respectively). Statistically significant differences for first authors were not found in either period (P=0.08 and P=0.48). CONCLUSION: This study identifies differences in gender trends for authorship in paediatric radiology research worldwide. Future efforts to increase authorship by women are needed.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, YuchiaoBACKGROUND: 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, EmmaJagsi, ReshmaImportance: 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.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »