PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7

Understanding the significant underrepresentation of women in radiology Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-03)
Peraka, Veena
;
Raj, Karuna
;
Champine, Julie
;
Ozcan, Bersu
;
Dogan, Basak
The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the reasons for a significant underrepresentation of women in radiology. We systematically examined the gender disparity within radiology across career stages, including medical school, residency training, and faculty positions. A comprehensive literature analysis was conducted to identify the determinants influencing female medical students' and physicians' pursuit of radiology. Despite women making up approximately half of medical school graduates, their representation in radiology remains disproportionately low. Contributing factors include a scarcity of female mentors and insufficient exposure to radiology during medical training, leading to persistent misconceptions about the specialty. Additionally, female radiology faculty members encounter challenges, including gender bias and difficulty advancing in leadership positions, which contribute to professional dissatisfaction. Strategies like the formation of Women in Radiology groups and institutional initiatives have been established to increase mentorship for female trainees and progression of faculty in their careers. The underrepresentation of women is a concern that warrants attention due to the unique collaborative and empathetic dimensions that women contribute to patient care and education. Throughout their careers, women encounter numerous obstacles that affect their exposure to, involvement in, and satisfaction with the field. Addressing these barriers is crucial for enhancing the presence and influence of women in radiology.
Mind the gap: Gender disparities in authorship in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2024-12)
Bolderston, Amanda
;
McCuaig, Carly
;
Ghosh, Sunita
;
McEntee, Mark F.
;
Kiely, Elizabeth
Abstract Introduction Research studies tracking gender and academic publication productivity in healthcare find gender disparities in research activity, publication, and authorship. Article authorship is one of the important metrics to track when seeking to understand gender inequality in academic career advancement. Research on gender disparities in publication productivity in the field of Medical Radiation Science (MRS) is very limited thus this study analyses and explains potential gender differences in article authorship and acceptance for publication in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences (JMIRS) for a 5-year period (2017–2021). Methods Gender was inferred based on the author's first name or title (e.g., Mr, Mrs or Ms). For those who left the title blank or reported as ‘Dr’ or ‘Prof,’ a series of steps were taken to identify their gender. Where gender was impossible to ascribe, these authors were excluded. Descriptive and inferential statistics are reported for the study population. Descriptive and inferential statistics are used. Percentages of females are reported, and males constitute the other portion. Chi-square, slope analysis and z-tests were used to test hypotheses. Results Results show that female authorship overall and in all categories of authorship placement (i.e., first, last and corresponding) increased over the timeframe reviewed. The percentage gain in the increase was higher than that for male authorship. However, male authorship started from a higher baseline in 2017 and has also increased year on year and overall, as well as in each placement category examined. More female authors were in the MRS sub-specialism Radiation Therapy (RT) than in the other MRS sub-specialisms. Analysis of the acceptance rate of articles with female authors shows a weak downward trend, and this may be related to higher submission and acceptance rates of articles by male authors during the same period. Conclusion Male authors are overrepresented in all categories, which raises questions about the persistence of gender disparities in JMIRS authorship and article acceptance. Positive trends in female authorship indicate progress, yet there is the persistence of the significant under-representation of women in the Medical Radiation Sciences workforce in academic publishing. Recruiting more males to address the gender imbalance in the profession should not be at the expense of females’ career progression. RÉSUMÉ Introduction Les études de recherche portant sur le genre et la productivité des publications universitaires dans le domaine des soins de santé révèlent des disparités entre les genres en matière d'activité de recherche, de publication et de paternité d'articles. La paternité d'un article est l'une des mesures importantes à suivre lorsqu'on cherche à comprendre l'inégalité entre les genres dans l'avancement de la carrière universitaire. La recherche sur les disparités entre les genres dans la productivité des publications dans le domaine des sciences de la radiation médicale (MRS) est très limitée; cette étude analyse et explique donc les différences potentielles entre les genres dans la paternité des articles et l'acceptation pour publication dans le Journal de l'imagerie médicale et des sciences de la radiation (JIMSR) sur une période de 5 ans (2017–2021). Méthodologie Le genre a été déduit sur la base du prénom ou du titre de l'auteur (par exemple, M., Mme ou Mlle). Pour ceux qui n'ont pas indiqué de titre ou qui ont indiqué « Dr » ou « Prof », une série d'étapes ont été suivies pour identifier leur genre. Lorsqu'il était impossible d'attribuer un genre, ces auteurs ont été exclus. Des statistiques descriptives et inférentielles sont présentées pour la population étudiée. Des statistiques descriptives et inférentielles sont utilisées. Les pourcentages de femmes sont indiqués, les hommes constituant l'autre partie. Le chi carré, l'analyse de la pente et les tests z ont été utilisés pour tester les hypothèses. Résultats Les résultats montrent que le nombre d'auteurs féminins dans l'ensemble et dans toutes les catégories de positionnement (c'est-à-dire premier, dernier et correspondant) a augmenté au cours de la période examinée. Le pourcentage d'augmentation est plus élevé que pour les auteurs masculins. Toutefois, les auteurs masculins sont partis d'un niveau de référence plus élevé en 2017 et ont également augmenté d'une année sur l'autre, dans l'ensemble, ainsi que dans chaque catégorie de positionnement examinée. Les femmes auteurs étaient plus nombreuses dans la sous-spécialité radiothérapie (RT) des SRM que dans les autres sous-spécialités des SRM. L'analyse du taux d'acceptation des articles rédigés par des femmes montre une faible tendance à la baisse, qui peut être liée à des taux de soumission et d'acceptation plus élevés pour les articles rédigés par des hommes au cours de la même période. Conclusion Les auteurs masculins sont surreprésentés dans toutes les catégories, ce qui soulève des questions sur la persistance des disparités entre les genres en ce qui concerne l'autorat du JIMSR et l'acceptation des articles. Les tendances positives dans le nombre d'auteurs féminins indiquent des progrès, mais la sous-représentation significative des femmes dans la main-d'œuvre des sciences de la radiation médicale dans les publications universitaires persiste. Le recrutement d'un plus grand nombre d'hommes pour remédier au déséquilibre entre les genres dans la profession ne doit pas se faire au détriment de la progression de la carrière des femmes
Gender trends in authorships and publication impact in Academic Radiology—a 10-year perspective Open PDF
(2021)
Molwitz, I.
;
Yamamura, J.
;
Ozga, A.-K.
;
Wedekind, I.
;
Nguyen, T.-A.
Objectives: To analyze the development of publication numbers of female authors in high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals. Methods: In this bibliometric analysis, gender of the first (FA) and senior author (SA) was assigned to all original research articles and reviews, published in 10 high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals in 2007/8 and 2017/18. The adjusted event rate (AER) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) were calculated using mixed logistic and multinomial logistic regression models to assess and compare female publications according to impact factor, journal, author position, and combination. Results: The proportion of female FA and female SA in N = 6979 (2007/2008) and N = 7383 (2017/2018) articles increased to 29.1% and 16.1% in 2017/2018, respectively. While most female authorships were continuously observed in medium-impact journals, the strongest increase occurred for both female FA (AOR 2.0; p <.0001) and SA (AOR 2.1; p <.0001) in low-impact journals. Female SA published significantly more often in a low- (AOR 1.5) or medium- (AOR 1.8) than in a high-ranking journal. Among the high-ranking journals, female FA published most frequently in European Radiology (32.4%; 95% CI [29.3–35.8]; p <.0001), female SA in Investigative Radiology (15.9%; 95% CI [13.7–18.4]; p <.0001). Male same-sex authorships decreased (AOR 0.9), but remained at least twice as common as all-female or mixed authorships. Conclusion: The increase in female authorship is reflected in all impact areas. Female FA and SA increased most in low-ranking journals but are most common in medium-ranking journals. Female SA remain rare, especially in high impact journals. Key Points: • Compared to the proportion of female radiologists worldwide, female senior authors are underrepresented in all impact areas, in particular in high-impact journals. • Among the included high-ranking radiological journals, female first authors and senior authors were strongest represented in European Radiology and Investigative Radiology, while across all impact areas they mostly published in medium-ranking journals. • Female author combinations were more frequent in low- and medium- than in high-ranking journals, whereas male author combinations remained more common than female senior author collaborations in all impact areas. © 2021, The Author(s).
Women in radiology: gender diversity is not a metric-it is a tool for excellence Open PDF
(2020)
Kubik-Huch, Rahel A.
;
Vilgrain, Valérie
;
Krestin, Gabriel P.
;
Reiser, Maximilian F.
;
Attenberger, Ulrike I.
Women in Focus: Be Inspired was a unique programme held at the 2019 European Congress of Radiology that was structured to address a range of topics related to gender and healthcare, including leadership, mentoring and the generational progression of women in medicine. In most countries, women constitute substantially fewer than half of radiologists in academia or private practice despite frequently accounting for at least half of medical school enrolees. Furthermore, the proportion of women decreases at higher academic ranks and levels of leadership, a phenomenon which has been referred to as a "leaky pipeline". Gender diversity in the radiologic workplace, including in academic and leadership positions, is important for the present and future success of the field. It is a tool for excellence that helps to optimize patient care and research; moreover, it is essential to overcome the current shortage of radiologists. This article reviews the current state of gender diversity in academic and leadership positions in radiology internationally and explores a wide range of potential reasons for gender disparities, including the lack of role models and mentorship, unconscious bias and generational changes in attitudes about the desirability of leadership positions. Strategies for both individuals and institutions to proactively increase the representation of women in academic and leadership positions are suggested. KEY POINTS: • Gender-diverse teams perform better. Thus, gender diversity throughout the radiologic workplace, including in leadership positions, is important for the current and future success of the field. • Though women now make up roughly half of medical students, they remain underrepresented among radiology trainees, faculty and leaders. • Factors leading to the gender gap in academia and leadership positions in Radiology include a lack of role models and mentors, unconscious biases, other societal barriers and generational changes.
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, Aleeza
BACKGROUND: 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.
Author Gender Inequality in Medical Imaging Journals and the COVID-19 Pandemic Open PDF
(2021)
Quak, E.
;
Girault, G.
;
Thenint, M.A.
;
Weyts, K.
;
Lequesne, J.
Background: Early reports show the unequal effect the COVID-19 pandemic might have on men versus women engaged in medical research. Purpose: To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on scientific publishing by female physicians in medical imaging. Materials and Methods: The authors conducted a descriptive bibliometric analysis of the gender of the first and last authors of manuscripts submitted to the top 50 medical imaging journals from March to May 2020 (n = 2480) compared with the same period of the year in 2018 (n = 2238) and 2019 (n = 2355). Manuscript title, date of submission, first and last names of the first and last authors, journal impact factor, and author country of provenance were recorded. The Gender-API software was used to determine author gender. Statistical analysis comprised x2 tests and multivariable logistic regression. Results: Percentages of women listed as first and last authors were 31.6% (1172 of 3711 articles) and 19.3% (717 of 3711 articles), respectively, in 2018–2019 versus 32.3% (725 of 2248 articles) and 20.7% (465 of 2248 articles) in 2020 (P = .61 and P = .21, respectively). For COVID-19-related articles, 35.2% (89 of 253 articles) of first authors and 20.6% (52 of 253 articles) of last authors were women. No associations were found between first- and last-author gender, year of publication, and region of provenance. First and last authorship of high-ranking articles was not in favor of North American women whatever the year (odds ratio [OR], 0.79 [P = .05] and 0.72 [P = .02], respectively). Higher rates of female last authorship of high-ranking articles were observed in Europe (P = .003) and of female first authorship of low-ranking publications in Asia in 2020 (OR, 1.38; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.92; P = .06). Female first and last authorship of COVID-19–related articles was overrepresented for lowest-rank publications (P = .02 and P = .01, respectively). Conclusion: One in three first authors and one in five last authors were women in 2018–2019 and 2020, respectively. Although the first 2020 lockdown did not diminish the quantity of women-authored publications, the impact on the quality was variable. ©RSNA, 2021
Addressing Gender Disparity in Radiology Through Increased Mentorship and Earlier Authorship Open PDF
(2019)
Arriola, Ana
We examined the status of women's representation on radiology journal editorial boards around the world and evaluated temporal trends in female board representation. Data on the gender of editorial board members, deputy editors, and editors-in-chief of top general radiology journals from the United States and from five continents outside North America was collected, based on listings in mastheads of each journal at 5-year intervals from 1998 to 2018. Female editorial board representation was compared to female membership in national professional radiology organizations and national physician registries. One of 42 editors-in-chief (2.4%), 24 of 135 deputy editors (17.8%), and 345 of 2545 (13.6%) editorial board members were female for the 20-year period. The overall percentage of female editorial board members increased from 9.7% (41 of 423) in 1998 to 17.0% (97 of 569) in 2018 (p < 0.0001). In 2018, women were less represented on the editorial boards than female professional society membership for all geographic regions except Australia/New Zealand; this difference reached statistical significance in Korea, Brazil, Europe, and China. Female editorial board representation ranged from 11.3% to 33.3%, with no significant difference between the United States (21.5%) and other countries. Although the proportion of female editorial board members of radiology journals worldwide has increased over the past two decades, female editorial board composition generally underrepresents the percentage of female radiologists. Editorial board female representation does not differ significantly between the United States and other countries. To characterize the global research trend in radiology departments based on bibliometric indicators. As a source of information, Science Citation Index Expanded and Journal Citation Reports from Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) were used. Annual trends, journals of publication, subject categories of journals, collaboration indexes between authors and institutions, network of cowords and most cited papers were identified and analysed. The period of study was 2009–2018. 283,587 downloaded papers were analysed. The number of articles was increasing, as well as the percentage of funded works. Papers were published in 7314 different journals, being the most productive Plos One (5077), followed by American Journal of Roentgenology (4602) and European Radiology (3644). Most productive subject categories of journals were Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging (86,568 papers), Clinical Neurology (29,722) and Surgery (23,564). International collaboration has increased more than 5 points, from 15.2% in 2009 to 20.7% in 2018. Most cited articles were published in high impact journals outside the scope of diagnostic imaging. Most influential topics included technical innovations within imaging modalities. MRI replaced conventional radiography and CT as the imaging technique of choice in imaging research. The purpose of this study is to assess the current status of gender disparities in academic radiation oncology departments in the United States and the associated factors. The data were collected from publicly available resources, including websites of individual radiation oncology programs, the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and the Association of American Medical Colleges. We collected data on the gender information of residents in each year (postgraduate years 2-5) and of the faculty (attendings, program director, and chair) during the academic year 2018 to 2019. Spearman’s rho test, Pearson’s chi-squared test, and Fisher exact tests were used for evaluating the correlation among variables using SPSS version 24. Women constituted 30.8% of radiation oncology residents in the United States in 2019. Eight programs (12.5%) did not have any female residents in their programs, whereas 6 programs (9%) had women constituting more than half of their resident class. The fraction of female medical students applying to radiation oncology over the last 7 years varied between 27% and 33%. Female attending physicians accounted for 30.5% of all the attending physicians in the academic programs. In the leadership positions of the department, the gender gap was wider where only 19 (20%) and 11 (12%) of programs had female program director or chair, respectively. There was a positive correlation between the number of attending physicians and the number of female residents in programs (P = .01). A significant gender disparity continues to exist among the residents and physicians in the academic radiation oncology departments in the US. This disparity is pronounced in the leadership positions. The results of this study could be used as a benchmark to evaluate the progress that has been made by the efforts to improve gender disparities in radiation oncology.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results