PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Geographical Area: search.filters.geographical.USASubject: search.filters.subject.Surgery

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • 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 Trends in Authorship of Foot and Ankle Academic Literature Over 24 Years Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Vora, M.
    ;
    Kuripla, C.
    ;
    Ouyang, D.
    ;
    Sing, D.C.
    Underrepresentation of females in surgery is reflected in research productivity across academic medicine, with male faculty being more likely to publish research than their female counterparts. In this study, we aimed to describe the representation and longevity of female investigators among the authors of articles in 3 foot and ankle research journals from 1993 to 2017. In this retrospective bibliometric analysis, authors from 3 prominent foot and ankle research journals (Foot and Ankle International, The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery, and Foot and Ankle Clinics) were identified. The proportion of female authors who were first, middle, and senior authors and the total publication count per author were determined. From 1993 to 2017, 8132 original articles were published and a total of 6597 (81.1%) had an accessible author list. This allowed us to identify 25,329 total authors, of whom 22,961 (90.7%) were successfully matched to a gender. A total of 9273 unique authors were identified (females, 19.2%). Female representation increased for first and senior authors over the years from 6.5% and 5.9% (1993 to 1997) to 16.9% and 13.1% (2013 to 2017, p < .001), respectively. However, compared with male authors, female authors published fewer articles (mean: 1.7 versus 2.4, p < .001). Of the 2691 authors who first published during 2006 to 2011, 369 authors (13%), consisting of 8.1% females and 15% males (p < .001), continued to publish 5 years after their initial publication. Female representation in academic foot and ankle research has increased >2-fold over the past 2 decades. But despite these advances, compared to male authors, female authors are less likely to continue publishing 5 years after initial publication, and on average publish fewer articles. © 2019 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons
  • Item type:Publication,
    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.