PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

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

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item type:Publication,
    Scientific Impact of Women in Academic Surgery Open PDF 
    (2008)
    Housri, N.
    ;
    Cheung, M.C.
    ;
    Koniaris, L.G.
    ;
    Zimmers, T.A.
    Objective: To evaluate the scientific impact of women in the surgical literature. Methods: Gender of the principal investigator of every abstract presented at the 2002, 2003, and 2004 annual meetings of the Association for Academic Surgery and Society of University Surgeons was identified by internet search. Resulting publications were identified using PubMed. Journal impact factor and number of article citations were determined using ISI Web of Knowledge. Results: The principal investigator's gender was identified for 649 (98.8%) of the 657 abstracts presented at the 2002-2004 AAS meetings. Women authored 9.1% of abstracts and 11.8% of total resulting publications. The publication rate of abstracts by women was significantly higher than that of men (69.5% versus 52.4%, P = 0.0132). There was a trend toward higher average impact factors of journals in which female authors published (3.265 versus 2.673, P = 0.0626). There was no significant difference in mean number of citations per publication. The principal investigator's gender was identified for all 337 (100%) abstracts presented at the 2002-2004 SUS meetings. Women authored 11.0% of abstracts and 11.2% of resulting publications. Publication rates and average citation numbers were similar for female and male authors. The average impact factors of journals in which women published were significantly higher (4.741 versus 3.348, P = 0.0082). Conclusions: Although women comprise a small proportion of principal investigators on abstracts presented at these conferences, the quality of their presented work is equal to or better than those of their male counterparts. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Female authorship trends in the field of colorectal surgery: A retrospective bibliometric study Open PDF 
    (2023)
    He, S.
    ;
    Gong, J.
    Background: Gender disparity and hidden discrimination remained in the surgical subspecialties. This study aimed to explore the authorship gender composition in four high-impact colorectal surgery journals over the past two decades. Method: This cross-sectional study queried the Web of Science Core Collection database and PubMed (MEDLINE) for articles published in four high-impact colorectal surgery specialty journals between 2000 and 2021 (Database accessed at July 2022). Extracted data included authors' full names, institutions, year of publication and total citation numbers. Authors’ genders were assigned via gendrize.io, a third-party name predictor tool. Results: 100,325 authorship records were included in the final analysis. 21.8% of writers were identified as female, an increase from 11.4% (95% CI, 9.4%–13.3%) in 2000 to 26.5% (95% CI, 25.6%–27.4%) in 2021. Female authorship has risen in all authorship types, but women physicians were less likely to be the last authors than the first (OR, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.6–0.67) or middle authors (OR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.55–0.60). Female authorship has also increased substantially in different document types, but female authorships were less likely in editorials than original articles (OR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.7–0.83) and reviews (OR, 0.83; 95%CI, 0.74–0.94). Compared with male physicians, females were more likely to author in publications with reportable funding, either as first authors (OR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.12–1.78) or last authors (OR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.22–1.89). Authorship varied geographically, and countries with the highest female authorship percentage were mainly in Europe and North America. Conclusion: Female authorship has grown substantially in colorectal surgery literature. However, female physicians were still underrepresented and less likely to assume senior or leading authorship roles. © 2023
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Earliest Phase of Academic Surgical Training: An Area for Intervention Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Zheng, H.
    ;
    Al-Refaie, W.
    ;
    Chou, J.
    ;
    Galli, F.
    ;
    Lai, V.
    BACKGROUND: To overcome persistent gender disparities in academic surgery, it is critical to examine the earliest phase of surgical training. This national study sought to assess whether gender disparities also existed among surgical interns, as a proxy for medical school research experience in both quantity and quality. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2021 to 2022 public information of 1,493 US-graduated categorical general surgery interns, a bibliometric evaluation was conducted to assess medical school research experience. Multivariable linear regressions with response log-transformed were performed to evaluate the impact of intern gender on (1) total number of peer-reviewed publications, (2) total impact factor (TIF), and (3) adjusted TIF based on authorship placement (aTIF). Back-transformed estimates were presented. RESULTS: Of these interns, 52.3% were female. Significant differences were observed in TIF (male 6.4 vs female 5.3, p = 0.029), aTIF (male 10.8 vs female 8.7, p = 0.035), gender concordance with senior authors (male 79.9% vs female 34.1%, p < 0.001), Hirsch index (male 21.0 vs female 18.0, p = 0.026), and the geographic region of their medical schools (p = 0.036). Multivariable linear regressions revealed that female interns were associated with lower TIF (0.858, p = 0.033) and aTIF (0.851, p = 0.044). Due to a significant gender-by-region interaction, adjusted pairwise comparisons showed that male interns in the Northeast had approximately 70% higher TIF (1.708, p = 0.003) and aTIF (1.697, p = 0.013) than female interns in the South. CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparities existed in the quality of research experience in the earliest phase of surgical training. These timely results call for additional interventions by the stakeholders of graduate medical education. Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Scholarly Productivity Among Academic Foot and Ankle Surgeons Affiliated With US Podiatric Medicine and Surgery Residency and Fellowship Training Programs Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Casciato, Dominick J.
    ;
    Cravey, Kimberly S.
    ;
    Barron, Ian M.
    Foot and ankle surgeons practicing within academic medicine balance clinical or surgical training, course instruction, administrative duties, and research. Along with clinical skills and patient volume, promotion within academia often relies on scholarly productivity. Previous research across specialties described this productivity using variables including publications, citations, and the h-index, a scale that quantifies the productivity and citation impact of published works, among academic ranks. As no studies examine the scholarly impact of foot and ankle surgeons with academic appointments, this study aimed to analyze the productivity and gender differences present in this specialty. A systematic review of academic-affiliated foot and ankle surgery residencies and fellowships was performed; and faculty members were screened for sex, academic rank, publication history, citations, h-index, and years in practice. Among 234 programs reviewed, 44 programs allowed for the analysis of 106 practitioners with an academic rank eligible for analysis. Overall, 78.3% of practitioners were male with the most common rank being assistant professor. Men published more documents and maintained higher citations as well as longer years in practice, and this was significant (p < .05). A significant difference was exhibited among all academic ranks (p ≤ .001). Multivariate regression revealed the publication history and years in practice are strongly correlated with the h-index of providers (p ≤ .001). Foot and ankle surgeons practicing in an academic setting may use the results of this study to gauge their productivity and identify benchmarks that similar providers have met at varying academic ranks.