PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Gender Inequity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparity among top North American medical schools and their affiliated radiology departments Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-01)
    Ahmadi, Shukria
    ;
    Joarder, Ishraq
    ;
    Rotter, Lara K
    ;
    Hussain, Mehwish
    ;
    Yong-Hing, Charlotte J
    Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the degree of gender disparity in leadership positions at the top 25 medical schools in North America compared to their affiliated radiology departments. Methods The academic rank and leadership appointment of medical school and radiology faculty were obtained from publicly available official websites between June-November 2022. Gender was determined using self-identified pronouns on website biographies. Alternatively, gender API software was used. Finally, SCOPUS Elsevier was used to extract research output metrics including publication counts, citations, and h-indices. Statistical analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 25 software. Results 2216 individuals across 25 medical schools were included in this study. 1301 (58.7 %) were part of the medical school and 915 (41.3 %) were part of the affiliated radiology departments. Additionally, 1575 (71.1 %) were identified as men and 641 (28.9 %) as women. Rank biserial correlations showed a significant association between higher academic rank and male gender (rpb = 0.143, p < 0.001) regardless of affiliation (medical school leadership versus radiology faculty); this disparity was largest at the highest academic ranks. Male gender was associated with higher research productivity relative to female gender regardless of affiliation (p < 0.001). There were minimal statistical differences in leadership positions between genders, however the proportion of men holding the position of dean was two times higher than women. Conclusion The underrepresentation of women in academic medicine is prevalent in the top-ranking medical institutions in North America and disproportionately involves senior academic ranks and leadership positions.
  • Item type:Publication,
    A 20-year analysis of gender trends in oncology authorship in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Levy, M.S.
    ;
    Samarakoon, T.
    ;
    Smith, C.
    ;
    Goo, I.
    ;
    Duthely, L.M.
    Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate global longitudinal publication trends in oncology in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) from 2001-2020. Design: Retrospective bibliometric analysis. Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome measures were the numbers and percentages of women as first, last, and corresponding author across all CDSR oncology publications. Additional outcomes included authorship differences between countries and percentages of women authors over time compared using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. Results: In total, 548 articles were analyzed. Women were first authors in 52.26% (n=277) and corresponding authors in 50.75% (n=272), respectively. Women represented only 39.4% (n=210) of last authors, significantly less frequent than male counterparts (p < 0.001). The percentage of women last and corresponding authors has increased significantly in the past 20 years (p < 0.05). Countries such as the Netherlands and Australia consistently showed equitable representation in first, corresponding, and last authorship, while other countries such as Italy and China had uniformly low rates of female authorship. Coclusions: Our results highlight patterns of gender inequity in oncology publication authorship in the CDSR from 2001-2020 at a global level. Notably, women were less likely to serve in the last author position which, independent of assigned corresponding authorship, is generally assumed in academic oncology to designate the leader of a published study. Substantive efforts to correct this disparity are needed to achieve gender parity in publicly perceived leadership in oncology publications. Copyright © 2024 Levy, Samarakoon, Smith, Goo, Duthely, Van Zuilen, Huang and Pillai.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Narrowing gender gap in the research on echinococcosis and editorial contribution of women in parasitology journals Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Kaveh, R.
    ;
    Ashrafhesari, N.
    ;
    Mousavi, S.M.
    ;
    Fasihi Harandi, M.
    Gender equity and authorship diversity are believed to be the essential parts of building a dynamic scientific atmosphere. The purpose of the present study was to determine the status of gender equity in research on echinococcosis and the editorial diversity in major parasitology journals over the past four decades. All articles were retrieved from major databases from the years 1980, 2000, 2010, 2015, and 2020. Journals belonging to the four quartiles of parasitology journals listed in the Journal Citation Report were selected, and the gender and region of each editorial member were identified. Among the 3583 first authors of the articles published in all selected years, 2236 (62.4%) were men, whereas 1040 (29%) were women. There was a significant increase in women's contributions as the first author, from 6.8% in 1980 to 35.8% in 2020 (P <.001). A greater gender gap was found for the senior authors, showing 2391 (66.7%) men and 837 (23.4%) women. The gender gap has been narrowed in most of the six regions of the world, particularly for the Western Pacific region, where the gender inequity had almost diminished in 2020; i.e.The man-woman ratios of the first and last authors from this region were 2.25 and 1.75 in 1980, reaching 1.04 and 0.97, in 2020, respectively. Our findings also indicated that articles authored by men received 2.5 to 3.1 times more citations than women authors. Gender distribution of the editors-in-chief, associate editors, and editorial board members across all quartiles showed that 78.7%, 69.5%, and 72.7% were men, respectively, and mostly affiliated with the European and American regions. Findings of the present study showed that gender inequity is still present and women researchers continue to be the minority in the field of parasitology, particularly in the research on echinococcosis. © The Author(s), 2024.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The proportion of male and female editors in women's health journals: A critical analysis and review of the sex gap Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Grinnell, Madison
    ;
    Higgins, Shauna
    ;
    Yost, Kelli
    ;
    Ochuba, Olivia
    ;
    Lobl, Marissa
    BACKGROUND: Historically, women have been underrepresented in leadership positions in medicine. The reasons for this are multifactorial. In recent years, women's representation in medicine has improved. However, inequities in the proportion of men and women in medical leadership remain, especially with regard to editorial journal boards. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore current trends of women in leadership positions on journal editorial boards. METHODS: A comprehensive search for women's health journals was performed in collaboration with university librarians in February 2019 using EMBASE, Scopus, SciFinder, and MEDLINE records for journals with relevance to women's health. Each journal was e-mailed to verify the accuracy of the journal editorial boards listed on their respective webpages. Five categories, as well as the totals for each journal, were analyzed for the proportion of women versus men: editor-in-chief, associate editor, deputy editor, and section editor, and other. RESULTS: Women comprised the minority of positions on women's health editorial boards. Of the total 1440 board members included, 602 members (42%) were women and 838 members (58%) were men. Women occupied 54 of 132 editor-in-chief positions (41%), 257 of 596 associate editor positions (43%), 13 of 42 deputy editor positions (30%), 46 of 120 section editor positions (38%), and 232 of 549 other editor positions (42%). CONCLUSION: Although the sex gap in leadership in medicine is improving, it is still present. Our findings suggest that women are underrepresented as editors at most levels in women's health journals centered on topics such as reproductive health, obstetrics and gynecology, perinatology, gynecological oncology, and breastfeeding. With sponsorship/mentorship for women, flexible scheduling, and considerate thought in leadership appointment, this sex gap will continue to improve.