PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.RheumatologySubject: search.filters.subject.Cross-Sectional Studies

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender bias in guidelines and recommendations on rheumatology in Argentina: A bibliometric analysis Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-05)
    Navarro, Belén
    ;
    Sequeira, Gabriel
    ;
    Kerzberg, Eduardo
    Abstract Introduction Women constitute the majority in Argentine rheumatology research, but their participation in rheumatology guidelines and recommendations (RGRs) has not been evaluated. Objective To analyze women's representation in RGRs published between 2010 and 2024 that included at least one Argentine rheumatologist. Methods Cross-sectional bibliometric study of rheumatology guidelines and recommendations published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2024, including at least one rheumatologist affiliated with an Argentine center. Publications were identified through searches in PubMed, the Revista Argentina de Reumatología, and Google Scholar using predefined affiliation-based keywords. The main study variables were author gender, first and corresponding authorship, guideline classification national (NAC) or international (INT), and declared conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. Descriptive analyses were performed, and group comparisons were conducted using the Mann–Whitney U test and chi-square test. Results Eighty-seven RGRs were analyzed (79% INT), with a median publication year of 2021. Of 526 authors, 274 (52%) were women. In NAC RGRs, 57% of authors were women versus 43% in INT (p = 0.003). Among 25 first authors based in Argentina, 11 (44%) were women; among 12 corresponding authors, 5 (42%) were women. COIs were reported in 24 RGRs, totaling 59 declarations, 37 (63%) from men. Conclusions Although women are the majority among Argentine rheumatology researchers, their representation decreases in international publications and leadership roles. Conflicts of interest show a gender bias favoring men. Resumen Introducción Las mujeres son mayoría en la investigación reumatológica argentina, pero no se ha evaluado su participación en las guías y recomendaciones en reumatología (GRR). Objetivo Analizar la representación femenina en las GRR publicadas entre 2010 y 2024 que incluyeran al menos un/a reumatólogo/a con afiliación en Argentina (ARG). Métodos Estudio bibliométrico transversal de GRR en reumatología publicadas entre el 1 de enero de 2010 y el 31 de diciembre de 2024 que incluyeron al menos un/a reumatólogo/a ARG. Las publicaciones fueron identificadas mediante búsqueda en PubMed, Revista Argentina de Reumatología y Google Scholar utilizando combinaciones predefinidas en el campo de afiliación. Se registraron el género de los autores, la autoría principal y de correspondencia, la clasificación de la guía como nacional (NAC) o internacional (INT), y los conflictos de interés (COI) declarados. Se realizaron análisis descriptivos y comparativos (Mann–Whitney U y chi-cuadrado). Resultados Se analizaron 87 GRR (79% INT), con mediana de publicación en 2021. De 526 autores, 274 (52%) fueron mujeres. En las GRR NAC, el 57% de los autores fueron mujeres vs 43% en las INT (p = 0,003). Entre los primeros autores ARG, el 44% fueron mujeres; entre los autores de correspondencia, el 42%. Se declararon COI en 24 GRR (59 declaraciones), 63% correspondientes a hombres. Conclusiones La participación femenina es mayoritaria en las GRR NAC, menor en las INT y en los roles de liderazgo. Los COI muestran un sesgo de género favorable a los hombres.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The workplace culture, mental health and wellbeing of early- and mid-career health academics: a cross-sectional analysis Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Marck, Claudia H.
    ;
    Ayton, Darshini
    ;
    Steward, Trevor
    ;
    Koay, Hui-Fern
    ;
    Wiley, Joshua F.
    There are reports of poor working conditions for early and mid-career academics (EMCAs) in universities, however, empirical data using validated tools are scarce. We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey using validated tools to assess workplace satisfaction, exposure to workplace abuse, and mental health. Participants included employees of medical and health faculties of two of the largest Australian universities, surveyed between October 2020 and January 2021.Overall, 284 participants responded. Many reported job insecurity: half (50.7%) working on contracts with less than one remaining year. Workloads were considerable, with 89.5% of participants working overtime and 54.8% reporting burnout. Workplace abuse in the forms of bullying (46.6%), sexual harassment (25.3%), sexism (49.8%) and racism (22.5%) were commonly reported. Clinically significant symptoms of depression (28.0%), anxiety (21.7%) and suicidal ideation or self-harm (13.6%) were reported; with a higher prevalence among those working more overtime, and those exposed to workplace abuse. Priorities include providing a stable and safe workplace, increasing accountability and transparency in addressing workplace abuse, and supporting professional development.In summary, EMCAs in our study were commonly exposed to precarious employment conditions and workplace abuse. Our findings provide empirical evidence on where universities and funding bodies should direct resources and change organisational risk factors, to improve workplace culture.