PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.FranceSubject: search.filters.subject.Sexism

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    Are there gender differences in academic medical career aspirations related to research, mentoring and discrimination? A national cross-sectional study of French medical residents Open PDF 
    (BMJ, 2026-05)
    Deledalle, Aurore
    ;
    Congard, Anne
    ;
    Bour, Valentine
    ;
    Sarda, Élisa
    ;
    Cohen, Fleur
    OBJECTIVES: Academic medical careers remain marked by persistent gender inequalities, despite the growing feminisation of the medical workforce. The objective of this study was to examine whether gender differences exist in key individual and institutional determinants of academic medical career aspirations among medical residents, including research motivation, mentoring, work centrality, self-efficacy, perceived discrimination and stress. DESIGN: This was a national cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: Multicentre study conducted across 36 medical schools in France. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1570 medical residents (997 women and 573 men) voluntarily participated between November 2022 and February 2023. All participants completed validated self-report questionnaires. There were no exclusion criteria beyond being enrolled in a French residency programme. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Attitudes towards research (interest, motivation, significance) were measured using the Scale of Attitudes towards Research. Mentoring was assessed with the Mentor-Mentee Perception Questionnaire, work centrality with Hirschfeld and Feild's scale, self-efficacy with the General Self-Efficacy Scale, perceived discrimination with the Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Experiences of Academic Medical Faculty instrument and stress with the Perceived Stress Scale. Gender differences were analysed using t-tests or χ² tests with Holm-Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Compared with men, women reported lower research motivation (mean (SD) 21.0 (5.5) vs 22.8 (5.5); padj=0.011), lower research interest (27.1 (5.5) vs 28.1 (5.7); padj=0.011), lower work centrality (26.7 (7.0) vs 28.2 (8.1); padj=0.011) and lower self-efficacy (28.3 (5.2) vs 29.9 (5.0); padj=0.011). Women were less likely to report having a mentor (38.5% vs 44.5%; padj=0.02). They also reported substantially higher levels of experienced gender discrimination (22.8% vs 3.8%; padj=0.005), sexual harassment (57.7% vs 18.2%; padj=0.005) and perceived stress (8.48 (3.29) vs 7.27 (3.43); padj=0.011) CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences were observed across several individual and institutional factors associated with academic medical career aspirations. Reduced access to mentoring and greater exposure to discrimination and stress among women may contribute to lower research motivation and self-efficacy. These findings highlight the need for institutional strategies addressing mentoring, workplace culture and equity to support gender parity in academic medicine.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Plafond de verre pour les femmes dans les carrières hospitalo-universitaires en France Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Rosso, C.
    ;
    Leger, A.
    ;
    Steichen, O.
    OBJECTIVE: To determine whether career development in academic medicine is more difficult for women than for men, and, if any, the nature and level of barriers to this progression. METHODS: Extraction of full-time medical staff in a Parisian hospital group, through the SIGAPS platform; an online questionnaire survey of career choices and barriers experienced by full-time male and female physicians. The study population comprises 181 hospital practitioners and 141 academic physicians (49 associate professors and 92 full professors). RESULTS: Women represent 49% of the medical staff but 15% of full professors. This underrepresentation of women is more important among intensivists/anesthesiologists than technique-based specialists (such as radiologists, biologists…). There is no difference in scientific output, marital status and parenthood between women and men. On the other hand, there is a difference in attitudes highlighted by the EVAR risk-taking scale as well as in the burden of familial involvement and the prejudices felt by women during the academic selection process. CONCLUSION: The glass ceiling exists in one of the largest French hospital group. Career development principles promote merit, but should decrease the benefit of "masculine" attitudes in the competition for academic positions. Academic selection criteria should evolve to limit the disadvantage of women related to deeper familial involvement and less competitive strategies and risk-taking attitudes.