PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.RadiologyGeographical Area: search.filters.geographical.New Zealand

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender‐Based Outcomes in Grants, Prizes and Fellowship Success Rates in Clinical Radiology: A 14‐Year Review of Outcomes in Australia and New Zealand Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2025-09-24)
    Liu, Jack Edward
    ;
    Milner, Lisa
    ;
    Shaygi, Behnam
    ;
    Stewart, Michael
    ;
    Yazdabadi, Anousha
    ABSTRACT Introduction While gender disparities in the radiology workforce are well‐documented, there has been no analysis of outcomes for competitive awards in Australia and New Zealand. As formal recognition is critical for career progression, this study aimed to investigate gender‐based differences in application and success rates for grants, prizes and educational fellowships within the Australasian context. Methods We retrospectively reviewed applications for Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists' (RANZCR) Faculty of Clinical Radiology grants, prizes and educational fellowships from 2011 to 2024. Application and success rates were stratified by gender and compared to College membership demographics. Significance was assessed using Fisher's exact test. Results Across 333 total applications, 227 (68.2%) were from males and 106 (31.8%) from females, closely reflecting College membership gender ratios (69.2% male vs. 30.8% female). No significant gender disparity was found in the success rates for grants (40.3% for males vs. 35.0% for females, p  = 0.58), prizes (8.8% vs. 11.1%, p  = 0.08) or educational fellowships (36.7% vs. 32.1%, p  = 0.32). Application rates for each award type also broadly reflected the gender composition of the College membership. Conclusion This study is the first to examine gender differences in clinical radiology grant, prize and educational fellowship outcomes in Australia and New Zealand. We found no significant disparities in success rates, and application rates generally mirrored College membership, suggesting the award process itself is equitable. However, the continued underrepresentation of women in radiology underscores the need to examine broader structural and sociocultural factors that may impact engagement with competitive academic opportunities.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Radiology Society Committees and Leadership in North America and Comparison With Other Continents Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Maddu, K.
    ;
    Amin, P.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Mauricio, C.
    ;
    Norbash, A.
    Purpose: To evaluate gender distribution in radiology professional society leadership positions. Our study intends to assess and compare the gender distribution among leadership roles and professional society committee memberships of the radiology societies and seek an understanding of potential associations between gender, academic research metrics, institutional academic rank, and leadership roles. Methods: We identified radiology professional society committee members to assess relative gender composition in 28 radiology societies in North America, Europe, and Australia/New Zealand. The research metrics were obtained from the SCOPUS database and demographics and institutional affiliation through institutional websites' internet searches. Gender distribution by academic ranks and other discontinuous variables were analyzed using the Chi-Square test. Wallis tests. Results: Of the 3011 members of society committees, 67.9% were male, and 32.1% female. Among all the society members, the data showed that the proportion of committee members holding leadership positions was comparable between males (25.7%) and females (22.5%). However, when we did a subgroup analysis and disaggregated the data by leadership positions, we noted that among those who held the leadership positions, the proportion of males was more significant (n = 526, 70.7%) compared to females (n = 218, 29.3%). Overall, males had higher median publications, citations, H-indices, and active years of research (P< 0.0001). At all university academic ranks, men outnumbered females (P = 0.0015, Chi-square 15.38), with the most considerable disparity at the rank of professor (71.9% male, 28.1% female, P = 0.0003). Conclusion: There was male predominance amongst committee members in radiology societies. Our study found no significant differences between those in leadership positions, suggesting that once a member of a committee, females are equally likely as males to attain leadership positions. Analysis of committee members' academic rank and committee leaders demonstrated underrepresentation of females at higher academic ranks, and males overall had higher research metrics than females. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,