PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10

A Cross‑Sectional Analysis of Speaker Representation: Intentionality meets Intersectionality in Academic Global Surgery Open PDF
(Ubiquity Press, Ltd., 2025)
Feres, Brenda
;
Basu, Eilene
;
Jose, Anna Mary
;
Khan, Rabbey Raza
;
Kebede, Abeba Aleka
Introduction: Despite increased advocacy, women and professionals from low‑ and middle‑income countries (LMICs) remain underrepresented in global surgery. To address this, the Gender Equity Initiative in Global Surgery (GEIGS) launched an annual General Assembly (GA). This study evaluates trends in academic representation and leadership at the GA, emphasizing pathways to equitable mentorship, academic voice, and faculty development. Methods: A retrospective cross‑sectional analysis of GEIGS GA speakers from 2020 to 2025 was performed. Data from conference records and public sources included gender, country of practice, degree(s), leadership role, citation count, prior speaking experience, and topic area. Linear regression assessed trends in gender representation. Results: A total of 104 speakers were identified. Women comprised 83.7% (n = 87; p < 0.001). Leadership positions were held by 64.4% (n = 67). The most common degrees were MD (62.5%) and PhD (16.4%); 15.4% (n = 16) were medical students. Of the speakers, 60.6% (n = 63) practiced in high‑income countries (HICs) and 39.4% (n = 41) in LMICs. Representation by women was consistent across regions: 84.1% in HICs and 82.9% in LMICs. Among LMIC speakers, 65.9% held leadership roles, 34.2% multiple degrees, and 68.3% prior speaking experience. No significant differences in academic qualifications were observed between HIC and LMIC speakers (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The GEIGS GA demonstrates that intentional, equity‑focused planning can achieve high female participation and meaningful inclusion of LMIC professionals. These findings provide a practical framework for promoting equitable representation in global surgery conferences. Continued attention to supporting LMIC voices in leadership and academia may help sustain progress.
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.
Closing the Gender Gap in Global Surgery: Trends at the Academic Surgical Congress Open PDF
(2021)
Padmanaban, V.
;
DaCosta, A.
;
Tran, A.
;
Kunac, A.
;
Swaroop, M.
Introduction: Female researchers are underrepresented in academic surgery. While they are increasingly producing original research, they lag male researchers in productivity. This disparity is not well understood within the nascent field of global surgery. The following study examines gender parity in global surgery research presented at the Academic Surgical Congress and within subsequent publications. Methods: Abstracts presented at the Academic Surgical Congress (ASC) between 2015 and 2019 in “Global Surgery” sessions were reviewed to obtain title, the first author (FA) and senior author (SA). The authors were classified by gender. The Scopus database was queried by two reviewers for abstracts with corresponding publications, citations, and journal impact factors. Statistical analysis was conducted using chi-square analysis and t-tests where appropriate. Results: Of a total of 6635 abstracts, 218 global surgery abstracts over a 5-year period were identified. Of these abstracts, 96 (44%) had female FAs, while 56 (26%) had female SAs. When comparing gender, female (44%) FAs and male (56%) FAs were equally represented. While SAs were significantly less likely to be female (26% versus 74%, P < 0.0001), female senior authorship increased significantly within the study period. Output with respect to publications, citations, and journal impact factors were equal by gender. Conclusions: This study presents 5 y of gender trends in global surgery scholarly work presented at the ASC. Despite an overall predominance of male senior authors, the paradigm is shifting with a recent trend to gender parity. Male and female authors have equal output and are equally impactful. Findings of gender equity in academic global surgery are encouraging, and further study of other disciplines are warranted. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
Gender-Related Trends in Publication Authorship: A 10-Year Analysis of a Brazilian Surgical Journal
(2021)
Motter, Sarah B.
;
Brandão, Gabriela R.
;
Iaroseski, Júlia
;
Alves, Amanda V.
;
Konopka, Ana Luíza K.
There is a gender gap in the representation of women in the authorship of surgical literature worldwide. In Brazil, data on the gender distribution of the authorship of articles are scarce; and hence, there is a lack of awareness about the contemporary situation of women surgeons within the academic surgery in the country. In light of this, we conducted this study with an aim to describe and evaluate the authorship trends in a Brazilian surgical journal over a period of 10 years (2010-2019). We included 4,301 authors from 792 articles extracted from 60 editions of this journal. We analyzed the female representation as authors in general, first and last authors, and the female surgeons' representation as first and last authors for 568 original articles. We found that, in general, women represented 27.8% of all authors. Regarding original articles, women surgeons represented 8.4% and 6.1% of first and last authors, respectively. The linear regression analysis demonstrated that there was an increase over the years in women authorship. However, despite this increase over the years, a gender gap still persists in terms of women's representation as authors in the Brazilian surgical literature.
Female and low- and middle-income authorship trends in high-impact ENT journals (2011-2020) Open PDF
(2023)
Jashek-Ahmed, Farizeh
;
Daudu, Davina
;
Heer, Baveena
;
Ali, Hawa
;
Wiedermann, Joshua
INTRODUCTION: Despite a recent drive to increase diversity, the global academic workforce is skewed in favor of authors from high-income countries, and women are under-represented in the published medical literature. OBJECTIVES: To explore the trends in authorship of three high-impact otolaryngology journals over a ten-year period (2011-2020). METHODS: Journals selected: JAMA Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Laryngoscope and Rhinology. Articles were reviewed from four issues per journal per year, and data was collected on: time of publication; subspeciality; number of authors; sex of first and last authors; country of practice of first author and country where each study was conducted. Trends were examined though univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: 2998 articles were included. 93.9% of first authors and 94.2% of studies were from high-income countries.Women were first authors in 31.5% (n = 912) and senior authors in 18.4% (n = 524) of articles. Female first authorship significantly increased between 2011 and 2020 however female senior authorship remained the same. There have been no significant changes in the proportion of published articles from low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) over time (p = .65). Amongst the LMIC articles, 72% came from Brazil, Turkey or China and there were no published papers from countries with a low-income economy (gross national income per capita of $1085 or less). CONCLUSIONS: Although female first authorship has increased in the last decade, there has been minimal other demographic change in authorship over this time. High-impact otolaryngology journals poorly represent academia in low-and-middle income countries. There is a need for increased advocacy promoting gender and geographical research equity in academic medicine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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
Trends in Female Authorship in High Impact Surgical Journals between 2008 and 2018 Open PDF
(2022)
Hart, K.L.
;
Boitano, L.T.
;
Tanious, A.
;
Conrad, M.F.
;
Eagleton, M.J.
Objective: This study evaluates the distribution of authorship by sex over the last 10 years among the top 25 surgical journals. Summary of Background Data: Despite an increase in women entering surgical residency, there remains a sex disparity in surgical leadership. Scholarly activity is the foundation for academic promotion. However, few studies have evaluated productivity by sex in surgical literature. Methods: Original research in the 25 highest-impact general surgery/subspecialty journals were included (1/2008-5/2018). Journals with <70% identified author sex were excluded. Articles were categorized by sex of first, last, and overall authorship. We examined changes in proportions of female first, last, and overall authorship over time, and analyzed the correlation between these measurements and journal impact factor. Results: There were 71,867 articles from 19 journals included. Sex was successfully predicted for 87.3% of authors (79.1%-92.5%). There were significant increases in the overall percentage of female authors (b = 0.55, P<0.001), female first authors (b=0.97,P<0.001), and female last authors (b = 0.53, P < 0.001) over the study period. Notably, all cardiothoracic subspecialty journals did not significantly increase the proportion of female last authors over the study period. There were no correlations between journal impact factor and percentage of overall female authors (rs = 0.39, P = 0.09), female first authors (rs = 0.29, P = 0.22), or female last author (rs = 0.35, P = 0.13). Conclusions: This study identifies continued but slow improvement in female authorship of high-impact surgical journals during the contemporary era. However, the improvement was more apparent in the first compared to senior author positions. © 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
One hundred most-cited articles in head and neck surgery and analysis of female authorship Open PDF
(2023)
Trent, M.S.
;
Michelle, L.
;
Roman, K.
;
Kim, J.K.
;
Haidar, Y.M.
Background: While female head and neck surgeons have made significant contributions to the field, women's achievements in scientific communication have traditionally been underreported. Methods: A search of high-impact journals in the field of head and neck surgery was performed in the Elsevier's Scopus database to identify the top 100 most-cited articles. Results: The top 100 most-cited articles (during the span of 1953 and 2016) had the highest total number of citations between 2005 and 2009. Women accounted for 36% of first authors and 25% of corresponding authors. Change in the relative number of first female authors in these top 100 articles did not increase significantly between 1950 and 2019. Conclusion: The proportion of female first authors in head and neck surgery has not significantly increased over the past several decades, despite greater numbers of female trainees. Our findings support the need for additional research on female representation in head and neck surgery. © 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
21st century gender trends of authorship in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Open PDF
(2022)
Reeves, Samuel
;
Loke, Wee Lee
;
Mullerat-Pigem, Maria
;
Patel, Dhruvi
;
Brennan, Peter A.
Despite forming the majority in undergraduate medicine and dentistry programmes, females remain under-represented in all surgical specialties, including oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Efforts are ongoing to promote female uptake in surgery. Research output is a key metric in measuring leadership and academic advancement within a specialty. The aim of this study was to assess female authorship in research published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery from 2000-2020 with a retrospective cohort study of original articles and reviews published in the journal from five different volumes of the journal (2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 as representative time points). The gender of the first and last authors were assessed for gender by first name recognition and verified with a web-search of the author using their stated institutional affiliation when this was not clear. Articles were excluded if the gender of one of the first or last author could not be determined. A total of 501 articles were included with the gender of 1002 authors analysed. 173 (17.3%) authors were female, and 828 (82.7%) were male. The most common author combination was male-male (70.3%) and the least common female-female (4.8%). The proportion of female authors increased over time from 9.3% in 2000 to 23.4% in 2020. Females remain under-represented within surgery, but female presence in academic output is increasing at a similar rate to the numbers of female uptake in the clinical workforce which is a promising sign and indicative of progress towards gender parity.
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.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results