PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Nuclear Medicine

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • 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,
    Gender Disparities in Authorships of Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia Research Articles Open PDF 
    (IOS Press, 2019)
    Menzel, L.C.
    ;
    Kramer, P.W.
    ;
    Groneberg, D.A.
    ;
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    Background: Alzheimer's disease and dementia are an increasing burden affecting more than 50 million patients worldwide. Hence, research has increased significantly in recent decades. It is recognized that female authors are systematically underrepresented in research in general. Objective: In this article, we examine gender disparities in academic research on dementia and Alzheimer's disease in the last decade. Methods: 104,858 male and female authorships from 37,961 original research articles were analyzed. The global and country-specific distribution of women across first, co, and last authorships was determined with the inclusion of a citation and productivity analysis. Results: 42.1% of all authorships and 50.2% of the first, 42.2% of the co, and 32.8% of the last authorships were held by women. Women were less commonly cited, published fewer articles and were also less likely to secure prestigious authorships in articles with multiple authors compared with men. Distinct differences were observed among the countries. Conclusion: Substantial growth in the number of prestigious female authorships has been observed to date and is predicted to continue in the future, with an emphasis on the progressive representation of women and a diminishing gender gap. © 2019 - IOS Press and the authors.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women Authors in Nuclear Medicine Journals: a Survey from 2014 to 2020 Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Lasnon, C.
    ;
    Girault, G.
    ;
    Lebtahi, R.
    ;
    Ansquer, C.
    ;
    Lequesne, J.
    Despite the feminization of the medical workforce, women do not have the same career perspectives as men. In nuclear medicine, little information is available on the gender gap regarding prominent author positions of scientific articles. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate recent trends in the gender distribution of first and last authorship of articles published in nuclear medicine journals. Methods We conducted a bibliometric analysis of first and last author gender of articles published from 2014 to 2020 in 15 nuclear medicine journals. Manuscript title, article type, journal impact factor, date of publication, first and last name and country of provenance of first and last authors were noted. The Gender-API software was used to determine author gender. All statistics were descriptive. Results Women represented 32.8% of first authors and 19.6% of last ones. Female authorship increased from 28.2% (428 of 1518 articles) in 2014 to 35.5% (735 of 2069 articles, relative increase 72%) in 2020 (p<0.001) for first authors and from 15.6% (237 of 1518 articles) in 2014 to 20.5% (424 of 2069 articles, relative increase 79%) in 2020 (p<0.001) for last ones. Parity was forecasted in 2035 for first authors and in 2052 for last ones. Female authorship increased in Europe for first (p=0.014) and last authors (p<0.001), in highranking journals for first (p=0.004) and last authors (p<0.001) and in other journal ranks for last authors (p=0.01). Female first and last authorship rose for original articles (p=0.02 and p=0.01 respectively) and case reports (p<0.001 and p=0.002 respectively). Regarding collaborations, the proportion of articles produced by male first and last authors decreased from 62.2% in 2014 to 52.9% in 2020 in favor of female first and last authors (OR=1.07, p<0.001), male first and female last authors (OR =1.05, p<0.001) and female first and male last authors (OR=1.03, p<0.001). Conclusion Female first and last authorship in nuclear medicine journals increased substantially from 2014 to 2020, in particular in high-ranking journals, in Europe and for original articles and case reports. Male/male collaborations decreased by 10% in favor of all other collaborations. Parity can be foreseen in a few decades. © 2022 Society of Nuclear Medicine Inc.. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Academic Radiology in the United States: Defining Gender Disparities in Faculty Leadership and Academic Rank Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Goswami, Abhishek K.
    ;
    Kokabi, Nima
    ;
    Khaja, Minhaj S.
    ;
    Saad, Wael E.
    ;
    Khaja, Akram
    RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Female physicians in academic medicine have faced barriers that potentially affect representation in different fields and delay promotion. Little is known about gender representation differences in United States academic radiology departments, particularly within the most pursued subspecialties. PURPOSE: To determine whether gender differences exist in United States academic radiology departments across seven subspecialties with respect to academic ranks, departmental leadership positions, experience, and scholarly metrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study from November 2018 to June 2020, a database of United States academic radiologists at 129 academic departments in seven subspecialties was created. Each radiologist's academic rank, departmental leadership position (executive-level - Chair, Director, Chief, and Department or Division Head vs vice-level - vice, assistant, or associate positions of executive level), self-identified gender, years in practice, and measures of scholarly productivity (number of publications, citations, and h-index) were compiled from institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, Scopus, and official NPI profiles. The primary outcome, gender composition differences in these cohorts, was analyzed using Chi2 while continuous data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. The adjusted gender difference for all factors was determined using a multivariate logistic regression model. RESULTS: Overall, 5086 academic radiologists (34.7% women) with a median 14 years of practice (YOP) were identified and indexed. There were 919 full professors (26.1% women, p < 0.01) and 1055 executive-level leadership faculty (30.6% women, p < 0.01). Within all subspecialties except breast imaging, women were in the minority (35.4% abdominal, 79.1% breast, 12.1% interventional, 27.5% musculoskeletal, 22.8% neuroradiology, 45.1% pediatric, and 19.5% nuclear; p < 0.01). Relative to subspecialty gender composition, women full professors were underrepresented in abdominal, pediatric, and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05) and women in any executive-level leadership were underrepresented in abdominal and nuclear radiology (p < 0.05). However, after adjusting for h-index and YOP, gender did not influence rates of professorship or executive leadership. The strongest single predictors for professorship or executive leadership were h-index and YOP. CONCLUSION: Women academic radiologists in the United States are underrepresented among senior faculty members despite having similar levels of experience as men. Gender disparities regarding the expected number of women senior faculty members relative to individual subspecialty gender composition were more pronounced in abdominal and nuclear radiology, and less pronounced in breast and neuroradiology. Overall, h-index and YOP were the strongest predictors for full-professorship and executive leadership among faculty. KEY RESULTS: ● Though women comprise 34.7% of all academic radiologists, women are underrepresented among senior faculty members (26.1% of full professors and 30.6% of executive leadership) ● Women in junior faculty positions had higher median years of practice than their male counterparts (10 vs 8 for assistant professors, 21 vs 13 for vice leadership) ● Years of practice and h-index were the strongest predictors for full professorship and executive leadership.