PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
9 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, National-, institutional-, and individual-level determinants of psychiatric research excellence: Analysis of Stanford-Elsevier lists of the top 2 % scholars worldwide (2017–2023) Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-02) ;Riad, Abanoub ;Alkasaby, Muhammad ;Changchroenkul, NisaratKoščík, MichalBackground Research excellence is increasingly used as a benchmark for academic evaluation in medical sciences, including psychiatry. However, bibliometric analyses often prioritize productivity over quality. This study examined national, institutional, and individual determinants of psychiatric research excellence using a multi-level ecological framework. Methods We analyzed the Stanford–Elsevier Lists of the top 2 % scholars (2017–2023), incorporating 51 independent variables. These included: (a) national determinants grouped into five domains (mental healthcare, gender equity, socioeconomic development, budgetary policies, and disease burden), (b) institutional factors derived from global and discipline-specific rankings, and (c) individual factors of gender and academic age. The primary outcome was the number of excellent psychiatric scholars (EPS), with secondary indicators including citation counts, modified H-index, composite score, and self-citation share. Results Psychiatric research excellence was concentrated in high-income, English-speaking countries, with significant institutional elitism. A small number of institutions hosted a disproportionate share of EPS. Gender disparities persisted, with female representation negatively associated with national gender gaps in employment and education, but positively linked to government spending on education. Academic age positively correlated with citation-based performance metrics. Multivariable models confirmed the explanatory roles of gender, academic age, official language, gender equity, and human development. Conclusion Psychiatric research excellence reflects systemic advantages related to income, language, institutional prestige, and gender equity. Equitable funding, support for emerging research environments, and expanded international collaboration are essential to fostering broader participation in high-impact psychiatric research.Item type:Publication, Increase in the percentage of female authors in the international psychiatric literature since 1970(2008) ;Opgenhaffen, M. ;Vansteelandt, K. ;Germeau, P.Pieters, G.BACKGROUND: The participation of women in medicine and psychiatry is increasing. AIM: To find out whether this trend is also refected in the international psychiatric literature. METHOD: We took steps to discover the gender of the first and the last author as listed below the title of 290 articles sampled at random jrom three leading psychiatricjournals published between 1970 and 2007. RESULTS: Women turned out to be underrepresented as the first or last author of these psychiatric articles; this conclusion was also found to apply to the first and last authors who were medical authors. Whereas the proportion of female first authors had increased significantly since 1970 and had reached almost 50% in 2007, there had been no such inaease as far as last authors were concerned. CONCLUSION: In the psychiatric literature studied, the proportion of female first authors rose to almost 50%.Item type:Publication, Trends in female authorship in two major psychiatry journals in India Open PDF(2022) ;Menon, V. ;Varadharajan, N. ;Bascarane, S.Andrade, C.Women authors are under-represented in academic medicine and academic publishing. We examined the representation of women in key authorship positions in psychiatric journals in India as well as time trends in female authorship across a decade. All articles originating from India and published in two leading Indian psychiatry journals during 2019–2020 were examined and compared with articles published in these journals during 2009–2010. Important outcomes examined were representations of women as first author, corresponding author, and last author, and the number of women in authorship lists. A total of 817 articles was analyzed; of these, 251 (30.7%) were published during 2009–2010 and 566 (69.3%) during 2019–2020. Women first-authored just over a quarter of the articles (n = 218, 26.7%). Nearly half of the articles (n = 389, 47.6%) had no woman author. Representation of women in key authorship positions and in total authorship increased significantly across time. Notably, the proportion of women first authors significantly increased for original papers (24.5% in 2009–2010 vs 38.1% in 2019–2020, p = 0.011). Gender gap in academic psychiatry publishing in India has narrowed during the past decade but is still evident. There is a need to identify and address factors that could narrow the gender gap. © 2022 Elsevier B.V.Item type:Publication, Gender Trends in Authorship in Psychiatry Journals From 2008 to 2018 Open PDF(2019) ;Hart, Kamber L. ;Frangou, SophiaPerlis, Roy H.BACKGROUND: Women are currently underrepresented in academic psychiatry. As publication activity reflects both leadership and participation in academia, we examined temporal trends in women's authorship by conducting a large-scale bibliometric study of psychiatry journals. METHODS: We examined changes in proportions of women in the first, last, and overall authorship positions over time; relationship to journal impact factor and editorial board makeup; and rates of transition to senior author status using original research articles published in the 24 highest-impact psychiatry journals between January 2008 and May 2018. RESULTS: In 30,934 articles, women represented 40.0% of all authors in 2008 and 44.8% in 2018, with a significant increase in the percentage of women as first authors (2008: 43.5%, 2018: 49.5%; B = 0.64, p = .002) and last authors over time (2008: 30.0%, 2018: 35.7%; B = 0.64, p = 1 × 10-5). Articles with women as last authors were significantly more likely than those with men as last authors to have a woman as first author (χ21 = 126.1, p < 2.2 × 10-16). Women exhibited slower rates of transition to the last author position (log rank p = 2 × 10-16); time to 10% transition was 5 years for men and 9 years for women. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate continued improvement in the representation of women authors in psychiatry journals, resulting in near parity in first authors. However, slower rates of transition to the senior author position and continued underrepresentation of women as senior authors suggest ongoing challenges in achieving gender parity in academic leadership. At the present rate of change for last authors (0.64% increase per year), women would achieve parity in senior authorship in ∼20 to 25 years.Item type:Publication, Gender distribution in psychiatry journals' editorial boards worldwide. Open PDF(2019) ;Hafeez, Dawood M. ;Waqas, Ahmed ;Majeed, Salman ;Naveed, SadiqAfzal, Khalid I.Gender disparity has been documented in advanced doctoral degrees, research, and academic positions, and therefore, it can logically be deduced that the gender disparity would be found in journals' editorial boards. In this study, we sought to determine the gender distribution in editorial boards of psychiatry journals worldwide. We also studied the academic achievements of editorial board members by comparing professional background, education level, and research productivity indices. We analyzed the gender of editorial members of 119 psychiatry journals from Clarivate Analytics' Journal Citation Reports. Our data included 8423 editorial board members from which we randomly selected 10% editorial board members to represent the full sample for further analyses. Overall, women represented 30.4% of editorial board and approximately 30% in each category: (1) Editor-in-chief/deputies, (2) Associate/section editors, (3) Editorial board*, and (4) Advisory board. The majority (65%) of men were M.D. psychiatrists, and women (58%) were Ph.D. psychologists. Women in editorial leadership positions (Category 1 & 2) were correlated with fewer women in editorial or advisory boards. Women had half the mean number of publications than men while serving journals with approximately the same mean impact factor. Our study results show that, besides gender disparity, gender bias does not exist in the psychiatry journal editorial boards. Given the implication of the editorial board position on science, academic advancement, and networking, this disparity remains detrimental to achieving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academic psychiatry.Item type:Publication, Gender inequality in the global mental health research workforce: a research authorship scoping review and qualitative study in Nepal Open PDF(2021) ;Gurung, Dristy ;Sangraula, Manaswi ;Subba, Prasansa ;Poudyal, AnubhutiMishra, ShellyINTRODUCTION: Although women's health is prioritised in global research, few studies have identified structural barriers and strategies to promote female leadership and gender equality in the global health research workforce, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to evaluate gender equality in the mental health research workforce in Nepal. The scoping review assessed gender disparities in authorship of journal publications for Nepal mental health research, using databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, NepJol, NepMed) for 5 years. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 Nepali researchers to identify structural barriers limiting women's leadership. RESULTS: Of 337 articles identified, 61% were by Nepali first authors. Among Nepali first authors, 38.3% were women. Nepali women had half the odds of being first authors compared with men, when referenced against non-Nepali authors (OR 0.50, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.16). When limiting publications to those based on funded research, the odds were worse for first authorship among Nepali women (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.71). The qualitative analysis supported the scoping review and identified a lack of gender-friendly organisational policies, difficulties in communication and mobility, and limited opportunities for networking as barriers to women's leadership in global health research. CONCLUSION: Efforts are needed for greater representation of Nepali women in global mental health research, which will require transformative organisational policies to foster female leadership. Those in leadership need to recognise gender inequalities and take necessary steps to address them. Funding agencies should prioritise supporting organisations with gender equality task forces, policies and indicators.Item type:Publication, Renewal of academic psychiatry without addressing gender equity will render it Jurassic rather than endangered Open PDF(2023) ;Galbally, M ;Eggleston, K ;Northwood, K ;Siskind, DBerk, MWhile two editorials have raised concerns about the decline in Australian academic psychiatry, for a genuine rejuvenation to ever occur, we will need to re-examine how women can be better included in this important endeavour. While attainment of fellowship has reached gender parity, academic psychiatry has disappointingly lagged, with 80% of its senior leadership roles across Australia and New Zealand still held by men, with a similar situation in the United Kingdom and the United States as well as many other countries. Encouraging women into academic psychiatry is not only critical to progress as a profession but also will help address the current blindness to sex differences in biological psychiatry, as well the social impact of restrictive gender norms and the effects of gender-based violence on mental health. This potentially creates opportunities for significant gains and insights into mental disorders. However, addressing the barriers for women in academia requires tackling the entrenched disparities across salaries, grant funding, publications, teaching responsibilities, keynote invitations and academic promotions alongside the gender-based microaggressions, harassment and tokenism reported by many of our female academics. Many women must grapple with not just a 'second shift' but a 'third shift', making the burden of an academic career unreasonable and burnout more likely. Addressing this is no easy task. The varied research in academic medicine reveals no quick fixes, although promoting gender equity brings significant potential benefits. Areas such as academic psychiatry need to recognise our community's growing discomfort with workplaces that choose to maintain status quo. Gender equity must be a critical part of any quest to revive this important area of practice for our profession.Item type:Publication, Gender Differences in Research Productivity among Academic Psychiatrists in Canada Open PDF(2019) ;Chauvin, S. ;Mulsant, B.H. ;Sockalingam, S. ;Stergiopoulos, V.Taylor, V.H.Objectives: Gender inequity in academic medicine persists despite increases in the number of women physicians. We sought to explore gender differences in research productivity for academic psychiatrists in Canada. Methods: In a cross-sectional study of the 3379 psychiatrists in all 17 university departments of psychiatry in Canada, research productivity, as measured by the h-index and number of publications, was compared between women and men using a negative log binomial regression model to generate relative rates (RRs), adjusted for career duration (aRR). Findings were stratified by academic rank, institution region, and institution size. A subanalysis of those with 10 or more publications was conducted as a proxy for identifying physicians on a research track. Results: Women (43% of the sample) had a lower mean (standard deviation) h-index than men (2.87 [6.49] vs. 5.31 [11.1]; aRR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 0.72). Differences were significant only for junior faculty and not for associate and full professors. Comparison by number of publications followed a similar pattern (aRR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.55). Among those with 10 or more publications (n = 721), differences between men and women were smaller than in the overall cohort for both the h-index (aRR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.87) and number of publications (aRR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.72). Conclusions: Gender differences in research productivity at the national level in academic psychiatry in Canada support a call to adopt a more systematic approach to promoting equitable opportunities for women in research, especially in early career, to improve diversity and enhance future psychiatric research and discovery. © The Author(s) 2019.Item type:Publication, Accelerating the Bending Arc Toward Equality: A Commentary on Gender Trends in Authorship in Psychiatry Journals Open PDF(2019)Bearden, Carrie E.In this issue of Biological Psychiatry, Hart et al. (1) offer a compelling new analysis of gender trends in authorship in psychiatry journals over the past decade. Hart et al. (1) offer both good news and bad news. Want the good news first? There has been a significant increase in the percentage of women, as both first and last authors, over the past decade. In fact, near parity in gender representation has been achieved for first authors. Now for the bad news: women exhibit slower rates of transition to senior authorship—5 years for men and 9 years for women, on average. Why? There is not an obvious single answer, but there are a few key takeaways.