PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Language: search.filters.language.EnglishSubject: search.filters.subject.Publication

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 23
  • Item type:Publication,
    Enhancing equity within the promotions dossier evaluation—Strategies to mitigate biases Open PDF 
    (Frontiers Media SA, 2026-01-09)
    Joy, Tisha R.
    Gender, racial, and ethnic disparities in career advancement in academic medicine continue to exist despite ongoing calls to diversify the physician workforce and leadership representation. Compared with white men, women and racially and ethnically underrepresented physicians are more likely to enter academic medicine, but less likely to achieve promotion. Cited barriers to academic advancement include ambiguous or inconsistent criteria for consideration for promotion and lack of standard processes for reviewing applications. The promotions committee therefore is an important rate-limiting step subject to biases that impact not just tenure, but also leadership opportunities and physician salaries. This perspective article explores areas where biases influence promotion criteria evaluation, including but not limited to accomplishments within teaching, research, and/or service, external recognition, candidate statements, and reference letters. The article then will propose strategies helpful to promotion committee members to help mitigate these biases and provide more equitable promotion evaluation.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Evaluating the research performance of women scientists in Indian research laboratories based on Scopus citation database: A bibliometric analysis
    (2022)
    Mukherjee, B.
    This study examines the contributions of women scientists currently working in various research organizations under the Ministry of Science and Technology, India. Women scientists were identified through the official websites of the research laboratories and their publication performance has been tracked using the Scopus database. There are 901 women scientists working in 78 research organizations under the Ministry and have published 21810 publications up to December 2019, almost 65 percent of which has been appeared during 2010 to 2019. The publication per scientist has risen from 6.85 article per year before 2000 to 10.45 paper in 2015-2019 which indicates increasing participation of women in science from India. Women scientists are primarily engaged in biological sciencesresearch, however fields such as materials sciences, nano-technology, and astrophysics are also becoming the preferred subject choices among women. Women scientists mostly published their articles as a member of a team of utmost 10 authors, however, their position in multi-authored articles is mostly as co-authors than that of principal authors. Women in the age group ofbetween31 to 40 produced maximum publications, and almost 98 percent of publications appeared in collaboration with other scientists.This study confirms that publication productivity does not decline with age. There are women scientists who stay active in research and keep their productivity at a high level until their retirement. The study suggests that the increasing participation of women in Indian science is encouraging, as such more funding opportunities to younger women researchers may be important to give them more lead time to build a strong career. © 2022
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in scholarly productivity of US academic surgeons Open PDF 
    (Academic Press Inc., 2016)
    Mueller, C.M.
    ;
    Gaudilliere, D.K.
    ;
    Kin, C.
    ;
    Menorca, R.
    ;
    Girod, S.
    Background Female surgeons have faced significant challenges to promotion over the past decades, with attrition rates supporting a lack of improvement in women's position in academia. We examine gender disparities in research productivity, as measured by the number of citations, publications, and h-indices, across six decades. Materials and methods The online profiles of full-time faculty members of surgery departments of three academic centers were reviewed. Faculty members were grouped into six cohorts by decade, based on year of graduation from medical school. Differences between men and women across cohorts as well as by academic rank were examined. Results The profiles of 978 surgeons (234 women and 744 men) were reviewed. The number of female faculty members in the institutions increased significantly over time, reaching the current percentage of 35.3%. Significant differences in number of articles published were noted at the assistant and full but not at the associate, professor level. Women at these ranks had fewer publications than men. Gender differences were also found in all age cohorts except among the most recent who graduated in the 2000s. The impact of publications, as measured by h-index and number of citations, was not consistently significantly different between the genders at any age or rank. Conclusions We identified a consistent gender disparity in the number of publications for female faculty members across a 60-year span. Although the youngest cohort, those who graduated in the 2000s, appeared to avoid the gender divide, our data indicate that overall women still struggle with productivity in the academic arena. © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Academic medicine’s glass ceiling: Author’s gender in top three medical research journals impacts probability of future publication success Open PDF 
    (Public Library of Science, 2022)
    Krstacic, J.E.
    ;
    Carr, B.M.
    ;
    Yaligar, A.R.
    ;
    Kuruvilla, A.S.
    ;
    Helali, J.S.
    Introduction In December 2017, Lancet called for gender inequality investigations. Holding other factors constant, trends over time for significant author (i.e., first, second, last or any of these authors) publications were examined for the three highest-impact medical research journals (i.e., New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], and Lancet). Materials and methods Using randomly sampled 2002-2019 MEDLINE original publications (n = 1,080; 20/year/journal), significant author-based and publication-based characteristics were extracted. Gender assignment used internet-based biographies, pronouns, first names, and photographs. Adjusting for author-specific characteristics and multiple publications per author, generalized estimating equations tested for first, second, and last significant author gender disparities. Results Compared to 37.23% of 2002 – 2019 U.S. medical school full-time faculty that were women, women’s first author publication rates (26.82% overall, 15.83% NEJM, 29.38% Lancet, and 35.39% JAMA; all p < 0.0001) were lower. No improvements over time occurred in women first authorship rates. Women first authors had lower Web of Science citation counts and coauthors/collaborating author counts, less frequently held M.D. or multiple doctoral-level degrees, less commonly published clinical trials or cardiovascular-related projects, but more commonly were North American-based and studied North American-based patients (all p < 0.05). Women second and last authors were similarly underrepresented. Compared to men, women first authors had lower multiple publication rates in these top journals (p < 0.001). Same gender first/last authors resulted in higher multiple publication rates within these top three journals (p < 0.001). Discussion Since 2002, this authorship “gender disparity chasm” has been tolerated across all these top medical research journals. Despite Lancet’s 2017 call to arms, furthermore, the author-based gender disparities have not changed for these top medical research journals - even in recent times. Co-author gender alignment may reduce future gender inequities, but this promising strategy requires further investigation. © 2022 Krstacic et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in prosthodontics: Authorship and leadership, 13 years of observation Open PDF 
    (2010)
    Kongkiatkamon, S.
    ;
    Yuan, J.C.-C.
    ;
    Lee, D.J.
    ;
    Knoernschild, K.L.
    ;
    Campbell, S.D.
    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine gender disparities in prosthodontics by reviewing the trend of female authorship in prosthodontic journals and exploring the role of female leadership in prosthodontic organizations and Advanced Education in Prosthodontic (AEP) programs.Materials and Methods: Three journals representing the prosthodontic specialty were selected to analyze the percentage of female dentist first and last (senior) authors for the years 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2008. Article inclusion criteria were restricted to the first or last authors who held at least a DMD/DDS/BDS degree and were from U.S. institutions. Data on female leadership in prosthodontic organizations and advanced education programs were collected, and the trends were studied. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. A linear regression analysis was performed to investigate the proportion of female authorship compared to male in the dental literature. A Fisher's Exact Test was performed to contrast differences of female first and last authorship in the selected journals between years 1995 and 2008.Results: Overall, there was no statistically significant linear increase in the proportion of either first or last female authorship compared to male authorship over time. With respect to each journal, the linear regression analysis showed that the increase of first female authorship was statistically significant (p = 0.016) compared to male authorship only in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. The percentage of female presidents of prosthodontic organizations has been very limited. A similar trend was also observed in AEP program director positions.Conclusions: Over the past 13 years, female dentists' participation in prosthodontics literature authorship has not increased significantly in the United States. Furthermore, female involvement in prosthodontics leadership has been limited over the past decades. © 2010 by The American College of Prosthodontists.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Distribution Associated With the Journal Wilderness & Environmental Medicine Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Keyes, Linda E.
    ;
    Schlein, Sarah M.
    ;
    Brown, Alainna B.
    ;
    Polukoff, Natalya E.
    ;
    Byrne, Alicia
    INTRODUCTION: Publication and peer review are fundamental to career advancement in science and academic medicine. Studies demonstrate that women are underrepresented in science publishing. We evaluated the gender distribution of contributors to Wilderness & Environmental Medicine (WEM) from 2010 through 2019. METHODS: We extracted author data from ScienceDirect, reviewer data from the WEM Editorial Manager database, and editorial board data from journal records. Gender (female and male) was classified using automated probability-based assessment with Genderize.io software. RESULTS: A total of 2297 unique authors were published over the 10-y span, generating 3613 authorships, of which gender was classified for 96% (n=3480). Women represented 26% (n=572) of all authors, which breaks down to 22% of all, 19% of first, 28% of second, and 18% of last authorships. Women represented 20% of peer reviewers (508/2517), 20% of reviewers-in-training (19/72), and 16% of editorial board members (7/45). The proportion of female authors, first authors, and reviewers increased over time. Women received fewer invitations per reviewer than men (mean 2.1 [95% CI 2.0-2.3] vs 2.4 [95% CI 2.3-2.5]; P=0.004), accepted reviews at similar rates (mean 73 vs 71%; P=0.214), and returned reviews 1.4 d later (mean 10.4 [CI 9.5-11.3] vs 9.0 d [95% CI 8.5-9.6]; P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: While female representation increased over the study period, women comprise a minority of WEM authors, peer reviewers, and editorial board members. Gender equity could be improved by identifying and eliminating barriers to participation, addressing any potential bias in review processes, implementing strategies to increase female-authored submissions, and increasing mentorship and training.
  • Item type:Publication,
  • Item type:Publication,
    Trends in Female Authorship in High Impact Surgical Journals between 2008 and 2018 Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Hart, K.L.
    ;
    Boitano, L.T.
    ;
    Tanious, A.
    ;
    Conrad, M.F.
    ;
    Eagleton, M.J.
    Objective: This study evaluates the distribution of authorship by sex over the last 10 years among the top 25 surgical journals. Summary of Background Data: Despite an increase in women entering surgical residency, there remains a sex disparity in surgical leadership. Scholarly activity is the foundation for academic promotion. However, few studies have evaluated productivity by sex in surgical literature. Methods: Original research in the 25 highest-impact general surgery/subspecialty journals were included (1/2008-5/2018). Journals with <70% identified author sex were excluded. Articles were categorized by sex of first, last, and overall authorship. We examined changes in proportions of female first, last, and overall authorship over time, and analyzed the correlation between these measurements and journal impact factor. Results: There were 71,867 articles from 19 journals included. Sex was successfully predicted for 87.3% of authors (79.1%-92.5%). There were significant increases in the overall percentage of female authors (b = 0.55, P<0.001), female first authors (b=0.97,P<0.001), and female last authors (b = 0.53, P < 0.001) over the study period. Notably, all cardiothoracic subspecialty journals did not significantly increase the proportion of female last authors over the study period. There were no correlations between journal impact factor and percentage of overall female authors (rs = 0.39, P = 0.09), female first authors (rs = 0.29, P = 0.22), or female last author (rs = 0.35, P = 0.13). Conclusions: This study identifies continued but slow improvement in female authorship of high-impact surgical journals during the contemporary era. However, the improvement was more apparent in the first compared to senior author positions. © 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women's representation in emergency medicine journals across two decades: 2000–2019 Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Vural, S.
    ;
    Sayılan, G.
    ;
    Şentürk, B.
    ;
    Yılmaz, M.B.
    ;
    Çoşkun, F.
    Objectives: The primary aim was to determine women's representation as authors in emergency medicine journals in various authorship positions over the last 20 years. The secondary aim was to compare the two decades to analyze the development over time. Method: We conducted a retrospective bibliometric analysis of three emergency medicine journals from the online archives of 2000–2019. Results: We analyzed a total of 7939 original research and review articles. Female authorships at the first (25,8%), last (18,7%), and corresponding (21,6%) positions were limited, despite the relatively high presence rate (72,5%). Women authored 13,1% of all single-authored publications. When the number of authors increased, the odds for women as co-authors increased. However, the odds for last and corresponding authorship decreased, while the odds for the first authorship remained unchanged. When two decades were compared, we found that proportions of women as first and corresponding authorship increased ([23,8% vs. 27,0%] p = 0.001 and [20,0% vs. 22,6%] p = 0.228, respectively) while the representation as the last author remained unchanged ([19,4% vs 18,3%] p = 0.006). The presence of women in any authorship position also increased significantly ([66,1% vs. 76,5%] p = 0.000) across two decades, with similar trends for the different journals studied. However, the yearly analysis shows that women's representation follows a fluctuating pattern with a minimal increase. When analyzing specific journals, we found that the increase in female authors as first and corresponding authors was limited to Academic Emergency Medicine ([24,7% vs 34,5%] p = 0.000 and [21,4% vs 32,1%] p = 0.000). Conclusions: Results of this study are promising in showing that the representation of women in emergency medicine publications is rising during the recent decade. Although the academic gender gap has not been closed, steps taken for gender equality in academic emergency medicine are clearly notable. © 2021 Elsevier Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender bias in the refereeing process? Open PDF 
    (2002)
    Tregenza, Tom
    Scientists are measured by their publications. Yet anonymous peer review is far from transparent. Does bias lurk within the refereeing process? Investigating the outcomes of manuscript submissions suggests that the overall process is not sexist, but differences in acceptance rates across journals according to gender of the first author give grounds for caution. Manuscripts with more authors and by native English speakers are more successful; whether this is due to bias remains to be seen.