PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10

Women in surgical academic Careers: What is needed to get there? Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-02)
Bosman, A.
;
Schreurs, W.H.
;
Smidt, M.L.
Despite comprising the majority of medical students, women remain significantly underrepresented in senior academic surgical positions. In the Netherlands, only 15.6 % of surgical professors are female. This article examines cultural and structural barriers, including unequal access to networks, underrepresentation on editorial boards, academic “housework,” implicit bias, and unequal caregiving responsibilities, that hinder women's advancement in academic surgery. Targeted interventions such as mentorships, flexible work policies, salary transparency, and gender-conscious recruitment (e.g., Eindhoven University of Technology's preferential hiring strategy) have shown promise in promoting equity without compromising academic output. The “critical mass” threshold of 28 % female representation emerges as a tipping point for cultural change. Achieving gender equity in academic surgery requires both systemic reform and cultural transformation to ensure equal opportunity, career sustainability, and inclusive institutional environments.
Gender representation trends in cardiothoracic surgery journal editorial boards Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2024-12)
Higaki, Adrian Acuna
;
Papageorge, Marianna V.
;
Waldron, Christina
;
Huggins, Lenique
;
Brinker, Morgan
Objective We aimed to characterize chronologic trends of gender composition of the editorial boards of major cardiothoracic surgery journals in the current era. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed of gender representation in editorial board members of 2 North American cardiothoracic surgery journals from 2008 to 2023. Member names and roles were collected from available monthly issues. Validated software programming was used to classify gender. The annual proportion of women representation was compared to the thoracic surgery workforce. Results During the study period, 558 individuals (3641 names) were identified, 14.3% of whom were women. The total number of editorial board women increased for both journals. The proportion of women also increased from 2.5% (3 out of 118) in 2008 to 17.8% (71 out of 399) in 2023 (P < .001), exceeding the percentage of women in the thoracic surgery workforce, which increased from 3.8% in 2007 to 8.3% in 2021 (P < .001). The average duration of participation was longer for men than for women (53.8 vs 44.5 months; P = .01). Women in editorial board senior roles also increased from 3.3% (1 out of 30) in 2008 to 28.6% (42 out of 147) in 2023 (P < .001), almost triple the increase in nondesignated roles from 2.3% (2 out of 88) in 2008 to 11.5% (29 out of 252) in 2023 (P < .001). Conclusions In recent years, the appointment of women to the editorial boards of high-impact cardiothoracic surgery journals and senior roles have proportionally exceeded the overall representation of women in cardiothoracic surgery. These findings indicate progress in inclusive efforts and offer insight toward reducing academic gender disparities.
Gender disparities in authorship in European cardio-thoracic journals Open PDF
(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025-06-19)
Galeone, Antonella
;
Cleuziou, Julie
;
Perrone, Fabiola
;
Maffei, Irene
;
Fiorinelli, Giorgia
OBJECTIVES The goal was to evaluate gender authorship in 2 cardio-thoracic surgical journals. METHODS We performed a bibliometric analysis of all articles published from 2017 to 2022 in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Interdisciplinary Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. For each article, the gender and academic rank of the first, senior and corresponding authors were verified by Internet search, email contact or use of the application Genderize.io. Articles were categorized based on topic, type and country of origin. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to evaluate gender authorship trend over time. RESULTS A total of 5243 articles were included in the analysis. Women represented 18% of first authors, 7% of senior authors and 13% of corresponding authors; no trend was seen over time. Women represented 16% of first authors and 7% of senior authors in adult cardiac surgery, 23% of first authors and 9% of senior authors in congenital cardiac surgery and 19% of first authors and 8% of senior authors in thoracic surgery. Male first authors were more frequently full professors (17% vs 5%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%), and male senior authors were more frequently full professors (48% vs 31%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%) compared to female senior authors. CONCLUSIONS The proportion of female authors is significantly lower than that of male authors in highest-impact European cardio-thoracic surgery journals, and no significant increase in female authorship has been demonstrated in recent years. Increasing awareness of gender disparities is essential to facilitate equal career opportunities and academic advancement for women in cardio-thoracic surgery.
Shattering the Glass Scalpel: Analyzing Female Representation in Orthopedic Surgery Across the United States Open PDF
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-03-05)
Loyst, Rachel A
;
Hidalgo Perea, Sofia
;
Vanhelmond, Taylor
;
Patterson, Diana
Background Orthopedic surgery has historically been a male-dominated field, with slower growth in female participation compared to other surgical specialties. The present study aims to assess the extent of this influence, examine whether the dynamic is changing, and further analyze female participation trends, focusing on various regions of the United States and including analyses of female residents. Methodology Orthopedic surgery residency programs were surveyed online. A list of 200 programs was sourced from the Association of American Medical Colleges, which provided details including the program names, cities, states, regions, and website links. The homepages of the residency program as well as the department of orthopedic surgery were surveyed for any mention of women or female in orthopedics, number of female residents, total number of residents (class of 2025-2029), number of female faculty operative orthopedic faculty, total number of operative orthopedic faculty physicians, specialty of the female orthopedic faculty, program director gender, assistant program director gender, and chair of the program gender. Data analyses were performed using SPSS Software version 28.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and Rstudio version 1.4.1106 (Boston, MA, USA). Results In total, 55 Midwest (28%), 53 Northeast (27%), 63 South (32%), and 27 West (14%) orthopedic surgery residency programs were included. Female orthopedic surgery residents comprised 23.7% of all orthopedic residents across the United States. When analyzed by geographic region, female residents comprised 22.7% of all residents in the Midwest, 24.3% in the Northeast, 22.5% in the South, and 27.0% in the West. In the Northeast region, there was a notable upward trend in the percentage of female residents across PGY5 to PGY1 years (τ = 1, p = 0.027). A total of 25 (12.6%) programs had a section in their residency program or orthopedic department website homepage that mentioned and/or was dedicated to women or females. There was a significant association between region and homepage mention of women (χ² (8, N = 198) = 105.7; p < 0.001). A total of 12.9% of all orthopedic residency program directors were female, while 21.2% of all associate program directors were female. Conclusions These findings underscore the importance of monitoring and addressing regional disparities in gender representation within orthopedic surgery residency programs. By identifying trends and disparities, healthcare institutions and policymakers can implement targeted interventions to promote gender equity and cultivate a diverse and inclusive workforce.
Equity in Access to Arthroplasty from a Gender Perspective: A Narrative Review Open PDF
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-06-04)
Patel, Neha
;
McDougall, Catherine
;
Arif, Azeta
Objective Despite growing gender diversity in medical education, orthopaedic surgery—particularly arthroplasty—remains one of the most male-dominated subspecialties. This review critically evaluates the barriers limiting female surgeons' access to arthroplasty, including disparities in training, mentorship, professional advancement, and leadership roles. In addition it explores the implications of gender disparities on workforce diversity, patient care outcomes, and surgical innovation while identifying strategies to enhance gender equity in the field. Introduction Women remain significantly underrepresented in arthroplasty, comprising a lower percentage of trainees, faculty, and senior consultants as compared to other surgical specialties. Systemic barriers such as implicit bias, limited mentorship, work-life balance challenges, and inequitable leadership opportunities contribute to this underrepresentation. These disparities influence career trajectories, limiting diversity in surgical perspectives and innovation. Addressing these issues is critical to achieving an equitable and inclusive workforce. Methodology A structured narrative review was conducted using peer-reviewed articles, institutional reports, and orthopaedic society publications. The Data were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and institutional databases, focusing on gender representation in orthopaedic surgery, mentorship initiatives, workforce statistics, and leadership opportunities in arthroplasty. Comparative analysis was performed across subspecialties and institutions, and recommendations from diversity and inclusion initiatives were evaluated to highlight successful interventions. Conclusion Achieving gender equity in arthroplasty requires systemic changes, including structured mentorship programs, leadership development workshops, and institutional commitments to diversity. Addressing implicit biases, promoting flexible training pathways, and fostering sponsorship programs for female surgeons are essential. A diverse workforce in arthroplasty will not only promote professional equity but also improve patient care and surgical innovation.
The Role of Women in the Top 100 Most Influential Arthroplasty Publications: A Bibliometric Analysis Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2025-04)
Payne, Camryn S.
;
Boddu, Sayi P.
;
Beckett, Nathan C.
;
Cancio-Bello, Alexandra M.
;
Bingham, Joshua S.
BACKGROUND: Women account for 2% of arthroplasty surgeons in the United States. It is important to understand how women contribute to the literature in the field of arthroplasty currently. We compared the proportion of first, middle, and senior authorship by women in the top 100 most-cited hip and knee arthroplasty studies published between 2010 and 2024 to the national proportion of women hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons and evaluated the H-indices of authors by gender. METHODS: The literature search was performed on the Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database. Once 100 studies met the inclusion criteria, those that did not originate from the United States or whose author first names were not included were excluded. The author's gender was determined by first name. The Scopus author database was used to determine the H-index for first and senior authors. RESULTS: There were 91 papers that met the criteria. These papers were produced by a total of 458 authors, of whom 13.7% were women. There were six (7.4%) of 81 unique first authors, 50 (15.8%) of 315 middle authors, and seven (11.3%) of 62 unique senior authors who were women. Women had lower average H-indices than men. CONCLUSIONS: Women's contributions to the most influential hip and knee arthroplasty articles are much higher than predicted given their underrepresentation in the field, indicating the substantial value they add to leading arthroplasty research. Despite this, disparities exist for women in authorship rank and H-index. These disparities may be mitigated by intentionally fostering greater support for women throughout all phases of orthopaedic surgery training to improve opportunities for impactful research and career advancement.
Authorship Trends and Gender Concordance in Surgical Research
(Elsevier BV, 2025-08)
Smith, Brandon T.
;
Villela-Castrejon, Javier
;
Rodriguez, Larissa
;
Kalva, Prathik
;
Beal, Taylor
INTRODUCTION: Building inclusive and diverse research teams is increasingly important in the era of team science. We explored authorship trends over the last 3 decades to assess progress in academic surgery. METHODS: Two general surgical journals (Journal of the American Medical Association Surgery and Annals of Surgery) and two nonsurgical multidisciplinary scientific journals (Nature and Science) were queried at 10-y intervals from 1991 to 2021. Data collected included total number of authors per article, instances of shared authorship, authors' gender, geographic location of the authors, and number of references per article. RESULTS: A total of 741 journal articles were examined. Over the last 3 decades, the number of women authors has nearly doubled in surgical journals and tripled in nonsurgical journals. The proportion of women authors per article, women first authors, and women senior authors all increased significantly, though women remain only 26% of all authors. Intriguingly, articles with a woman senior author had a significantly greater proportion of women coauthors than articles with a man senior author (55 ± 4% versus 12 ± 6%; P < 0.05) across all 3 decades in all journals. In 2021, only 10% of articles with a man senior author had an equal or greater proportion of women coauthors. CONCLUSIONS: Though there are now more women authors, we describe a pattern of gender concordance where women senior authors may publish with other women more than men senior authors. Our findings highlight both the progress made and potential for growth in achieving gender equity in academic surgery.
Sticky Floor, Broken Ladder, and Glass Ceiling: Gender and Racial Trends Among Neurosurgery Residents
(2021)
Maqsood, Hamza
;
Younus, Shifa
;
Naveed, Sadiq
;
Chaudhary, Amna Mohyud Din
;
Khan, Muhammad T.
Introduction Diversity and equity in academic medicine are critically important in improving healthcare standards and patient-related outcomes. Gender and racial disparities are some major challenges faced by the health system. This article reviews the gender and racial trends among residents of neurosurgery in the United States (US). Methods We retrospectively analyzed the data extracted from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)'s annual Data Resource Books from 2007 to 2019. ACGME cataloged gender as men and women and race/ethnicity was categorized as White/non-Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Island, Hispanic, Black/non-Hispanic, Native American/Alaskan, others, and unknown. Counts, proportions, relative, and absolute percentage changes were calculated to highlight trends in resident appointments over time and across the specialty of neurosurgery. Results The number of female residents increased steadily from 10.6% in 2007 to 19.3% in 2019; with an absolute increase of 8.74%, a relative increase of 63.9%, and a simultaneous decrease in male residents. When averaged across the nine-year study period, 51% of the study sample was White (non-Hispanic), followed by Asian/Pacific Islanders at 15.2%. The representation of Hispanics was 4.3%, Black/African Americans were 4.5%, Native Americans/Alaskans were 0.2%, and others were 8% of the total study population. Conclusion Our study concludes that gender and racial disparity persist within the neurosurgery residency training programs in the US. Concrete efforts at all academic levels are needed to provide greater support for the females and for the careers of underrepresented minority (URM) trainees to ensure their increased representation in neurosurgery.
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.
A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review Open PDF
(J Surg Res, 2024)
S, Subramanian
;
Rs, Maisner
;
N, Patel
;
A, Song
;
L, Yuan
Abstract Introduction: Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities. Methods: Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles. Results: Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005). Conclusions: While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results