PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
45 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, 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, TaylorPatterson, DianaBackground 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.Item type:Publication, 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.Item type:Publication, Is the gender gap closing in otolaryngology subspecialties? An analysis of research productivity Open PDF(2020) ;Okafor, S. ;Tibbetts, K. ;Shah, G. ;Tillman, B.Agan, A.Objective: The proportion of women specializing in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery (Oto–HNS) and seeking fellowship training has steadily increased over the last several years. In academic Oto–HNS, gender differences exist in research productivity, scholarly impact, and funding. This study aims to evaluate gender differences in academic productivity between otolaryngologists in early, mid-, and later careers stages and within various subspecialties. Methods: Departmental websites for all Oto–HNS residency programs were accessed, and data including gender, academic rank, and fellowship training/subspecialty field was collected. Bibliometric data including h-index, publication years, number of citations, documents, and coauthors was obtained from the Scopus database. Career groups were defined as early (1–5 years), mid- (6–15 years), and later (16+ years). Continuous data was compared using the t test. Results: Data was collected on 1,754 academic otolaryngologists (412 women, 1,342 men). Overall, men exhibited significantly higher h-indices, number of documents, citations, and coauthors and actively published for more years compared to women (P < 0.0001 for all variables). Similar trends persisted across all subspecialties. When authors were broken down into career groups, women and men showed similar research productivity across all career groups in the subspecialties of otology, facial plastics, and rhinology; however, in head and neck, laryngology, and pediatrics, women continued to lag behind men. Conclusion: This study suggests that female otolaryngologists within certain subspecialties are keeping pace with their male counterparts in publication productivity in the early career time frame. This represents a change from prior studies which have shown women to be less productive in the early career period. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 130:1144–1150, 2020. © 2019 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.Item type:Publication, Research Conducted in Women Was Deemed More Impactful but Less Publishable than the Same Research Conducted in Men Open PDF(Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers, 2021) ;Murrar, Sohad ;Johnson, Paula A. ;Lee, You-GeonCarnes, MollyBackground: Female scientists, who are more likely than their male counterparts to study women and report findings by sex/gender, fare worse in the article peer review process. It is unknown whether the gender of research participants influences the recommendation to publish an article describing the study. Materials and Methods: Reviewers were randomly assigned to evaluate one of three versions of an article abstract describing a clinical study conducted in men, women, or individuals. Reviewers assessed the study's scientific rigor, its level of contribution to medical science, and whether they would recommend publishing the full article. Responses were analyzed with logistic regression controlling for reviewer background variables, including sex and experience level. Results: There was no significant difference in perceived research rigor by abstract condition; contribution to medical science was perceived to be greater for research conducted in women than men (odds ratio = 1.7; p = 0.030). Nevertheless, reviewers were almost twice as likely to recommend publication for research conducted in men than the same research conducted in women (predicted probability 0.606 vs. 0.322; p = 0.000). Conclusions: These results are consistent with abundant data from multiple sources showing a lower societal value placed on women than men. Because female investigators are more likely than male investigators to study women, our findings suggest a previously unrecognized bias that could contribute to gender asymmetries in the publication outcomes of peer review. This pro-male publication bias could be an additional barrier to leadership attainment for women in academic medicine and the advancement of women's health.Item type:Publication, Being a female academic under neoliberal evaluation: A systematic review(2021) ;Mula-Flacón, J. ;Cruz-González, C. ;Segovia, J.D.Rodríguez, C.L.The current academic assessment system is drawing a scenario based on neoliberal values. It has contributed to the perpetuation of gender inequalities. This systematic literature review aims to synthesize the most relevant research on the impact of neoliberalism on the professional identity of female academics. For this purpose, a systematized bibliographic search was carried out in four different databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Education Resources Information Center, and Google Scholar), which yielded a total of 26 articles published in international journals. The results illustrate a research field dominated by the USA and the UK and a trajectory of growth in the literature in recent years. The emerging themes reveal some of the challenges faced by women academics in a neoliberal context. These obstacles may be external and even unconsciously imposed by women academics themselves. Motherhood emerges as one of the most influential aspects of their professional development. Furthermore, our findings explore various ways in which women academics reconstruct their identity in the face of systemic challenges. This manuscript culminates with a discussion of the impact that neoliberal values and their general consequences in the performance evaluation processes of academics have on women. Therefore, we provide a number of implications for professional practice and future lines of research. © 2021 The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.Item type:Publication, The publication gender gap in US academic surgery Open PDF(2017) ;Mueller, C. ;Wright, R.Girod, S.Background: Terms such as “glass ceiling” and “sticky floor” are still commonly used to describe women’s role in academic surgery. Despite continued efforts to address disparities between men and women in the field, gender inequalities persist. Methods: In this investigation we highlight gender differences in published surgical literature by both quantity and impact. Websites for departments of surgery of three academic centers were reviewed to assess the bibliometrics of publications by gender over a two-week period. Results: A one-way ANOVA showed a significantly higher H-index for men than women (p > .05). Further, one-way ANOVA showed significantly more articles published by men than women (p = .019). These differences are most dramatic at the rank of associate professor where the H-index for men is three times that of the women. The rank of full professor showed men had double the number of articles published. Conclusions: These findings align with the previous research that shows a disparity between males and females as they climb the academic ladder. Conducting and publishing research is a vital part of advancement in academic medicine. This study suggests that publication productivity may be a factor that hinders women from advancing within surgery compared to men. Continuing to explore and identify reasons for this gender difference in academic surgery may highlight ways to address the imbalance. © 2017 The Author(s).Item type:Publication, Gender differences in leadership positions among academic nuclear medicine specialists in Canada and the United States Open PDF(2019) ;Moghimi, S. ;Khurshid, K. ;Jalal, S. ;Qamar, S.R.Nicolaou, S.OBJECTIVE. Despite equal representation of genders among medical students, women continue to be underrepresented in the field of academic diagnostic radiology. These differences are manifest across subspecialties in academic medicine and even in diagnostic radiology. There are limited data available addressing diversity among nuclear medicine specialists. Thus, our primary objective was to compare gender representation in academic and leadership positions among faculty members in nuclear medicine in Canada and the United States. Our secondary objective was to study the influences to account for the existing disparity in academic nuclear medicine. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Using the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) and Canadian Resident Matching Service (CaRMS), we created a database of faculty members in nuclear medicine. For assessment of academic performance, the h-index, number of publications, number of citations, and years of active research were extracted using Scopus. RESULTS. The academic ranks of 237 faculty members were used for analysis; of this group, 16.95% of associate professors were female. Women were less frequently represented in higher academic ranks, and women were also less frequently represented in leadership ranks (13.6% female vs 86.4% male). The h-index was comparable across genders. CONCLUSION. Female nuclear medicine specialists are underrepresented in academic and leadership positions compared with their male counterparts. This difference in numbers is unlikely to be because of academic performance given that both genders had comparable academic performance metrics in our study. The results show the need for devising strategies to promote diversity in academic and leadership positions across nuclear medicine specialists. © American Roentgen Ray Society.Item type:Publication, Female Authorship of Opinion Pieces in Leading Otolaryngology Journals between 2013 and 2018 Open PDF(2020) ;Miller, A.L. ;Rathi, V.K. ;Gray, S.T.Bergmark, R.W.Although women represent an increasing proportion of the physician workforce, barriers to the professional advancement of women persist, particularly within surgical fields such as otolaryngology. Authorship of scientific opinion articles serves as an important opportunity for professional development. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study to characterize the authorship patterns of scientific opinion articles by gender in leading otolaryngology journals between 2013 and 2018. Outcome measures were the number and proportion of female physician first authors and female last authors as compared with the proportion of the otolaryngology workforce. Between 2013 and 2018, female authors accounted for 24.1% of first of multiple authors, 30.4% of sole authors, and 25.3% of last authors. Women were equitably represented in comparison with the proportion of practicing female otolaryngologists (17.1% in 2017). The proportion of female first authorship increased from 20.0% in 2013 to 32.0% in 2018. Additional efforts are necessary to support the equitable advancement of women in otolaryngology. © American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2019.Item type:Publication, Gender distinctions in patenting: Does nanotechnology make a difference? Open PDF(2018)Meng, Y.Analyzing the domestic patent records filed with the United State Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in the 16-year time period from 1990 to 2005, this study benchmarks the collaboration patterns and gender-specific performance in patenting nanotechnology, a newly emerging field, with those in the general area across all technological fields (thereafter the overall tech area, a proxy of traditional technological fields). Going beyond what has been discovered in a previous study that women’s involvement in patenting is lower than their male peers in nanotechnology, the empirical evidence reported here suggests that the gap to women’s disadvantage was smaller in nanotechnology than in the overall tech area in the studied period. The major finding of this study is that, while more than 90% of patents across fields were from industry where patenting is least likely to be collaborative, nano-patents have more diverse origins (79% from industry and 21 from universities, government, public institutions, and cross-sectoral collaboration) and are more likely to be collaborative outcomes (including those from industry). The profile of nanotechnology patents in terms of workforce sectors has the implication that nanotechnology presents an environment where women are more able to catch collaborative opportunities and engage in patenting. Implications for future research are discussed correspondingly. © 2017, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.Item type:Publication, Who am I, and who are you, and who are we? A Scientometric Analysis of Gender and Geography in HCI(2022) ;McKay, D. ;Zhang, H.Buchanan, G.Conference authorship, attendance and presentation is a key measure of quality in the HCI academic, yet we know conferences are not equally accessible for reasons that have nothing to do with quality. In this paper we examine two axes of diversity: gender, and geographic location (of both authors and conferences) and examine how they affect participation at major HCI conferences. Diversity in a group is associated with better outcomes from its work, and HCI has made numerous contributions to increasing representation in other communities. Reflecting on our own situation can produce recommendations for the planning of future HCI conferences, and identify challenges of representation that the HCI community should endeavor to address. © 2022 ACM.