PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.USASubject: search.filters.subject.Gender Equity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 19
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women Emergency Physicians and Gender Disparities from Entry to Advancement Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-07)
    Sethuraman, Kinjal N.
    ;
    Lall, Michelle D.
    ;
    Gorman, Emily F.
    ;
    Zeidan, Amy J.
    ;
    Agrawal, Pooja
    STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to summarize the last 20 years of published research on gender experience and disparities in the emergency medicine workforce. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE ALL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from 2003 to 2024, to identify original research investigating gender experience and disparities among physicians in emergency medicine in North America. We abstracted study design, sample characteristics, and outcomes. We analyzed data using an ad hoc iterative thematic analysis of the content areas as well as a synthesis of the key findings and research limitations. RESULTS: We identified 5,740 candidate publications and, after exclusions, included 191 (99% observational studies). We identified 15 themes: (1) workforce, (2) childbearing, (3) attrition, (4) evaluations, (5) bias and discrimination, (6) wellness, (7) professional development groups and mentorship, (8) authorship, (9) editorial board membership, (10) research grants, (11) national speakers, (12) awards, (13) leadership roles, (14) academic rank and promotion, (15) financial compensation and one subtheme (pediatric emergency medicine). We mapped these themes to 5 domains: (1) Recruitment and Retention, (2) Culture and Environment, (3) Academic Scholarship, (4) Recognition and Promotion, and (5) Clinical Care and Decisionmaking. There were 3 to 33 publications per theme. The quality of evidence was variable. We found fewer disparities, and improvement over time in the percentage of women academic faculty, women authorship, national speaking, and educational awards. We found consistent evidence of gender disparities disadvantaging women emergency physicians in financial compensation, editorial board membership, executive leadership roles, academic rank, and experiences of gender bias, with little change over time. CONCLUSION: Although some areas remain understudied, our central findings confirm that gender-based disparities continue to exist among emergency physicians. Future efforts should be redirected toward the development and assessment of interventions that combat these disparities.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in National Institutes of Health Funding for Family Medicine Faculty Open PDF 
    (American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM), 2026-01)
    Qazi, Shurjeel Uddin
    ;
    Cawse-Lucas, Jeanne
    ;
    Hussain, Mehwish
    ;
    Khurshid, Kiran
    ;
    Khosa, Faisal
    INTRODUCTION: The present study investigated the current trends of gender disparity in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding patterns for research within Family Medicine. METHODS: Funding data was collected from the online NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditure and Results (RePORTER) system for fiscal years 2017-2020, and information regarding each Principal Investigator (PI) was retrieved from the Scopus database and departmental websites. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis tests were performed on collected data for statistical comparison of continuous variables. RESULTS: We analyzed 730 grants in our analysis. Amongst them, 398 (54.5%) were awarded to women PIs and 332 (45.5%) to men PIs. The mean NIH grant amount awarded to men PIs (518,862±490,793.32) was significantly higher than the mean grant amount awarded to women PIs (450,195±428,405.62) (p = 0.04). The strongest correlation between NIH funding and academic output was observed for the number of publications of men PIs. When the gender of PI and co-PI were analyzed together, there was no significant difference in the number of grants or mean grant amount. Stratification by academic degree revealed no significant difference between both genders for the mean NIH grant amount. CONCLUSION: Despite the increasing representation of women within the discipline of family medicine, men continue to receive higher average NIH grant amounts compared to women. The differences are multifactorial and may include differences in academic productivity or grant committees' heuristics. Overall, the results were promising with little evidence of significant gender disequilibrium within NIH-funding for researchers in FM.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Experiences of Women Faculty in an Academic Medical Center Open PDF 
    (SAGE Publications, 2025-03-13)
    Esplin, Charlotte R.
    ;
    Calderwood, Lisa
    ;
    Weisenmuller, Chantel M.
    ;
    Luzier, Jessica L.
    BACKGROUND: Women faculty face different obstacles in academic medical careers than their men counterparts. Women faculty report feeling like "outsiders" and experiencing multiple barriers to career advancement compared with men, especially if they hold a nonmedical degree (e.g., PhD). This study examined aspects of workplace culture that differentially impact women at a large regional academic medical center (AMC) in the Appalachian region of the United States-a geographic area that is largely understudied in this body of literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven women completed a survey that included the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success instrument, the Professional Fulfillment Index, the Work and Family Conflict scale, and items measuring burnout, childcare availability, and demographic factors. RESULTS: Our findings revealed that many women faculty felt that they were being treated differently than men faculty, that work infringed on their home and family life, and that while they were professionally fulfilled at work, childcare problems exacerbated feelings of wanting to leave that AMC. About 60% of our sample indicated some level of burnout. CONCLUSIONS: These findings align with previous findings that women juggle multiple roles that are typically not expected of men, and this juggling may be one reason why women are not staying in academic medicine or being promoted at the same rate as men. We provide incremental validity for the measures used and delineate specific ideas for improvement, such as on-site childcare, standardized leave policies, and formal mentorship and curriculum programs.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women faculty achieve promotion to full professor equivalent to men faculty in a subset of US academic pathology departments Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-07)
    Leonard, Debra G.B.
    ;
    Limson, Melvin
    ;
    Fitzhugh, Valerie A.
    ;
    Barclift, Deniz Peker
    ;
    Ryan, Eileen A.
    Women faculty in academic medicine remain underrepresented at higher faculty ranks despite equal numbers of men and women medical students since 2003. This 2022 study asked if US academic pathology departments had achieved equity across academic rank for women faculty. The survey of 135 member departments of the Association for Academic Pathology requested data regarding chair characteristics, other department leaders' number and gender, and faculty number and gender by academic rank and track. Sixty-four (47%) member departments responded. Twenty-three of the responding departments (36%) had equity of women and men full professors, defined as <5% difference women and men full professors as a percentage of total faculty. Departments with professor gender equity more often had a woman chair (P < 0.01), and a higher percentage of women faculty (P < 0.05), women on the research tenure track (P < 0.01), and tenured women faculty (P < 0.01). Unstructured interviews with a subset of department chairs did not identify significant differences between departments with and without professor gender equity, except that equity was more driven by the intention of the chair (P < 0.01) and less by dean or institutional influence (P < 0.01). Over one third of US academic pathology departments responding to the survey have achieved equity for women and men full professors in current academic medicine institutions. This equity success for women is lost when looking at data by specialty or nationally, rather than by department.
  • 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,
    Gender Representation Among Major Plastic Surgery Society Achievement Award Recipients Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Ni, Tiffany
    ;
    Cebron, Urska
    ;
    Zuo, Kevin J.
    ;
    Stefaniuk, Stephanie
    ;
    Snell, Laura
    Purpose: Professional achievement awards are an important factor in recruitment, promotion, and faculty review within academic institutions. Studies have shown that subconscious, gender-based assumptions of individuals and their work in traditionally male-dominated fields lead to more positive evaluations of men than women, a phenomenon present among scientific and medical award committees. This study examined gender representation among recipients of major North American plastic surgery society awards over the last 50 years. Methods: Recipient lists of major achievement awards bestowed by ten American and Canadian plastic surgery societies between 1970 and 2020 were accessed online or by direct contact with the society. Awardee gender, institution affiliation, graduation year, fellowship status, and additional major awards received were recorded. Comparisons were made between gender representation among society presidents, board membership, general society memberships, attending physicians, and plastic surgery residency enrolment. Results: Thirty-two major awards given by ten plastic surgery societies were included. Six hundred and twenty-five awards were conferred, of which 47 recipients were female (7.5%). Of the 121 individuals that received multiple major awards, 8 were female. Two-thirds of female awardees (72%) were clinical plastic surgeons and the remainder were scientists. Over the past 50 years, there has been a gradual increase in the proportion of female award winners. Conclusions: Despite a gradual increase in the proportion of female awardees in major plastic surgery societies, female plastic surgeons remain underrepresented among awardees, with less than 10% of major awards conferred to females.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Does academic authorship reflect gender bias in pediatric surgery? An analysis of the Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2007–2017 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Marrone, Alexandra F.
    ;
    Berman, Loren
    ;
    Brandt, Mary L.
    ;
    Rothstein, David H.
    Background Gender representation in academic publications has been considered a surrogate for gender equity in medicine, although this concept has not been evaluated in pediatric surgery. Methods First and last author genders for Journal of Pediatric Surgery articles from United States and/or Canadian institutions (2007, 2012, 2017) were identified. These data were compared to gender proportions for applicants to and matriculants in pediatric surgery fellowships as well as among American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) members. Results Authorship gender was identified for 632/640 primary articles (98.8%). From 2007 to 2017, the proportion of women as first authors increased from 33.0% to 53.9% (p < 0.001) and as last authors from 16.2% to 26.4% (p = 0.01). The proportion of women fellowship applicants rose from 35.9% to 57.6% (p < 0.001); among those who successfully matched the rise was nonlinear (20.5%–34.0%, p = 0.16). APSA junior and senior women membership proportions rose during the study period [from 28.1% to 43.4% (p = 0.06 for linear trend) and 17.9% to 24.4% (p = 0.005 for linear trend), respectively]. Conclusions Over the past decade, the overall proportion of women authors in a leading academic pediatric surgery journal has increased significantly, although representation among last authors remains disproportionately low. The numbers of women applicants to pediatric surgery fellowship increased but there was not a concordant rise in the number of women accepted into training positions. Type of study Bibliometric analysis. Level of evidence n/a
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparity in Full Professor Rank Among Academic Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Marhoffer, Elizabeth A.
    ;
    Ein-Alshaeba, Samer
    ;
    Grimshaw, Alyssa A.
    ;
    Holleck, Jürgen L.
    ;
    Rudikoff, Benjamin
    PURPOSE: The gender gap in promotion in academic medicine is well established. However, few studies have reported gender differences in promotion adjusted for scholarly production and national or international reputation, namely, career duration, publications, grant funding, and leadership positions. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the differences between men and women in achieving benchmarks for promotion and analyze where such differences lie geographically and within specialties. METHOD: A systematic search of Academic Search Premier, Business Source Complete, Cochrane Library, ERIC, GenderWatch, Google Scholar, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from inception to August 17, 2022. All studies that reported the number of male and female full professors on medical school faculty were included. The primary outcome was the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for promotion to full professor for women compared with men. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. The unadjusted OR for promotion to full professor for women was 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.41). Sixteen studies reported an AOR. The pooled AOR of promotion for women to full professor was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.46-0.77). The AOR for promotion to full professor was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.34-0.88) in surgery and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.57-1.11) in internal medicine. Statistical heterogeneity was high ( Q = 66.6, I2 = 79.4%, P < .001). On meta-regression, 77% of the heterogeneity was from studies outside the United States, where more disparity was reported (AOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.22-0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Most studies continued to find decreased promotion of women. Gender disparity was particularly notable in surgery and in studies from outside the United States. The results suggest that differences in promotion were due to differences in productivity and leadership and to gender bias.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Toward Gender Equity in Academic Promotions Open PDF 
    (American Medical Association, 2021)
    Marcotte, Leah M
    ;
    Arora, Vineet M
    ;
    Ganguli, Ishani
    Promotion in academicmedicinedrives career opportunities, including leadership roles and salary increases. Yet women physicians face slower promotional timelines and are less likely to reach associate or full professorship compared with their male counterparts, a gap that has not meaningfully changed in more than 3 decades. 1In 2019, only 26% of full professors and 39% of associate professors in US medical schools were women despite representing 48% of assistant professors and 43% of all full-time US medical school faculty. 2 These disparities are even worse for women in underrepresentedminority groups. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a worrisome backslide.3 In leaving unrealized the full potential of female faculty, these disparities are detrimental to medicine as a whole. The promotion gapmaybepartiallyexplainedbyoutdated promotion processes that were developed when the physician workforce was largely male but now serve to disadvantage women throughout their academic careers. Too often we put the onus on women to change their behavior, but closing this gap will require institutions to make promotion systems and policies more equitable. In this Viewpoint, we unpack structural barriers to promotion, specifically for female junior faculty going from assistant to associate professor. We consider how institutionscan rethinkpromotionand reverseharms that were precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to promote gender equity leading up to promotion and at the time of promotion.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The gender composition of the members of the editorial board of toxicology journals: Assessment of gender equality Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Hancı, Volkan
    ;
    Yakar, Mehmet Nuri
    ;
    Shermatov, Nurgazy
    ;
    Kara, Fevzi
    ;
    İbişoğlu, Emel
    In many areas of medicine, gender equality has not yet been fully adopted despite recent developments. The inequality of gender in various areas of medicine is still debated. In this study, we analysed the gender composition of the editorial boards of toxicology journals in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) databases and the factors affecting this composition. The genders of the participants were determined by the data obtained from the official websites of the journals in September 2023. We analysed the journal metrics and publisher properties using Mann-Whitney U, Fisher's exact, Chi-square tests and Spearman's correlation coefficient. We used logistic regression analysis to reveal the independent factors related to gender parity. The representation rates of women were 28.62% on all editorial boards and 23.33% in editor-in-chief positions. The 'Neuroscience' (OR, 2.46 95%CI, 1.68-3.60, p < 0.001), 'Reproductive Biology'(OR, 2.05 95%CI, 1.22-3.42, p = 0.006) and 'Public, Environmental & Occupational Health'(OR, 1.49 95%CI, 1.18-1.88, p = 0.001) as a coverage category, the United States as a journal country (OR, 1.21, 95%CI, 1.04-1.40, p = 0.001), 5-year-IF≥3.6(OR, 1.54, 95%CI, 1.27-1.86, p < 0.001), 5-year H index≥29 (OR, 1.23, 95%CI, 1.01-1.49, p = 0.037) were the independent factors for gender parity. However, 'Oncology' (OR, 0.08 95%CI, 0.01-0.55, p = 0.011), 'Biochemistry, Molecular Biology' (OR, 0.62 95%CI, 0.44-0.86, p = 0.005) and 'Pharmacology & Pharmacy' (OR, 0.69 95%CI, 0.59-0.82, p < 0.001) as a coverage category, Japan as a publisher country (OR, 0.52 95%CI, 0.35-0.77, p = 0.001), and Switzerland as a journal country (OR, 0.61, 95%CI, 0.46-0.81, p = 0.001) were related to gender disparity. Greater endeavours are needed to reduce gender discrimination in toxicology. Toxicology authorities should continuously improve existing policies by optimising the analysis of objective information to eliminate barriers for toxicologists in terms of gender equality.