PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.SurgerySubject: search.filters.subject.Children

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Increases in female academic productivity and female mentorship highlight sustained progress in previously identified neurosurgical gender disparities Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Taha, Birra
    ;
    Sadda, Praneeth
    ;
    Winston, Graham
    ;
    Odigie, Eseosa
    ;
    Londono, Cristina
    OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was performed to understand disparities in the representation of female authorship within the neurosurgical literature and implications for career advancement of women in neurosurgery. METHODS: Author names for articles published in 16 of the top neurosurgical journals from 2002 to 2019 were obtained from MEDLINE. The gender of each author was determined using automated prediction methods. Publication trends were compared over time and across subdisciplines. Female authorship was also compared to the proportionate composition of women in the field over time. RESULTS: The metadata obtained from 16 major neurosurgical journals yielded 66,546 research articles. Gender was successfully determined for 96% (127,809/133,578) of first and senior authors, while the remainder (3.9%) were unable to be determined through prediction methods. Across all years, 13.3% (8826) of articles had female first authorship and 9.1% (6073) had female senior authorship. Female first authorship increased significantly over time from 5.8% in 2002 to 17.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Female senior authorship also increased significantly over time, from 5.5% in 2002 to 12.0% in 2019 (p < 0.001). The journals with the highest proportions of female first authors and senior authors were the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics (33.5%) and the Asian Journal of Neurosurgery (23.8%), respectively. Operative Neurosurgery had the lowest fraction of female first (12.4%) and senior (4.7%) authors. There was a significant difference between the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical trainees and the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical first (p < 0.001) and senior (p < 0.001) authors. Articles were also more likely to have a female first author if the senior author of the article was female (OR 2.69, CI 2.52-2.86; p < 0.001). From 1944 to 2019, the Journal of Neurosurgery showed a steady increase in female first and senior authorship, with a plateau beginning in the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: Large meta-analysis techniques have the potential to effectively leverage large amounts of bibliometric data to quantify the representation of female authorship in the neurosurgical literature. The proportion of female authors in major neurosurgical journals has steadily increased. However, the rate of increase in female senior authorship has lagged behind the rate of increase in first authorship, indicating a disparity in academic advancement in women in neurosurgery.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Glass Ceiling in Hand Surgery: Publication Trends by Gender
    (2022)
    Bram, Joshua T.
    ;
    Magee, Lacey C.
    ;
    Parambath, Andrew
    ;
    Bauer, Andrea S.
    ;
    Lawler, Ericka A.
    Background: Women are frequently underrepresented across surgical subspecialties and may face barriers to academic advancement. Abstracts presented at American Society for Surgery of the Hand annual meeting (ASSH-AM) highlight some of the top research in hand surgery. We sought to explore differences in abstract characteristics and publication rates based on senior author gender.Though there have been increasing efforts at inclusivity in orthopedic and plastic surgery, women face several barriers to entering the field, publish less frequently, and are underrepresented in leadership positions. Understanding the stages at which discrepancies in research productivity exist may help to address these challenges. Methods: Abstracts from the 2010-2017 ASSH-AMs were reviewed to determine basic characteristics. Author gender was determined through both a search of institutional websites for gender-specific pronouns and inference of gender based on first name. Subsequent full manuscript publications corresponding to the abstracts were identified through a systematic search of PubMed and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 560/620 (90.3%) abstracts from 2010-2017 had an identifiable senior author gender (14.5% female). No differences were noted between male- and female-authored abstracts regarding study design including sample size or level of evidence. Female senior authors were more likely than males to author abstracts focused on pediatrics (19.8% vs 9.4%, p=0.01) and were more likely to collaborate with female first authors (41.3% vs 20.0%, p<0.01). Abstract publication rates were lower for female senior authors versus male senior authors (61.7% vs 74.5%, p=0.02). Conclusion: The number of abstracts with female senior authors had similar representation to the membership proportion of women in the ASSH. There were few differences in abstract characteristics based on senior author gender, though senior authors tend to collaborate with investigators of the same gender. Abstracts authored by females were published 13% less frequently overall, meriting further exploration. Level of Evidence: III.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in Academic Productivity and Promotion Among Endocrine Surgery Faculty Open PDF 
    (Academic Press Inc., 2022)
    Ammann, A.M.
    ;
    Delman, A.M.
    ;
    Bethi, M.
    ;
    Turner, K.M.
    ;
    Sedaghat, A.R.
    Introduction: Academic rank and metrics such as total publications (pubs) and H-index are indicators to measure academic achievement. This study aims to determine whether there are gender differences in academic productivity or faculty appointments among endocrine surgeons in the United States. Methods: A database was generated from the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons (AAES) website. Community or academic practice was designated by institution affiliation and faculty appointment. Academic metrics, including pubs, H-index, and weighted-RCR (relative citation ratio), were obtained from public databases. Results: A total of 258 AAES members were affiliated with an academic institution. The majority were men (58%). Overall, men in endocrine surgery had higher academic metrics: pubs (56.0 [26-134], 23.0 [11-56], P < 0.0001), H-index (19.0 [11-35], 9.0 [5-21], P < 0.0001), weighted-RCR (63.5 [22-193], 24.1 [8-74], P < 0.005) and rank (associate professor or professor, P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis accounting for time in practice found no difference in total publications, weighted RCR, or faculty appointments between genders in practice for 0-5 y. However, among surgeons in practice for 6-10 y, men had higher academic metrics (pubs: 31.0 [16-79], 18.5 [9-33]; RCR: 46.0 [14-102], 13.3 [9-34]) and faculty appointments (all P < 0.05). Conclusions: There are gender disparities in academic productivity and faculty appointment among US endocrine surgeons. While junior faculty show no gender differences in most indicators of academic productivity or rank, men with 6-10 y in practice have higher average academic metrics and rank. Whether the absence of gender disparities among junior faculty is a sustainable reflection of recent efforts to encourage equal mentorship and professional opportunities or whether disparities will manifest as faculty progress remains to be determined. © 2022 Elsevier Inc.