PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Academic Medicine

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 25
  • Item type:Publication,
    A longitudinal analysis of gendered career trajectories and academic efficiency in North American MD/PhD faculty Open PDF 
    (Informa UK Limited, 2026-05-28)
    Quon, Stephanie
    ;
    Joseph, Marissa
    ;
    Khosa, Faisal
    Gender disparities in academic medicine persist despite increasing women's representation in higher education. Prior research highlights the underrepresentation of women in senior ranks and leadership roles, yet few studies have assessed these disparities using time-adjusted productivity metrics. This study aims to evaluate gender-based differences in academic rank, scholarly productivity, and leadership representation among MD/PhD faculty in North America, accounting for career length and institutional variability. A secondary analysis was conducted on a dataset of 6,149 MD/PhD faculty from 122 accredited North American medical schools. Time-adjusted measures of productivity, H-index per year and citations per year, were calculated. Gender differences in rank, productivity, and leadership were assessed using Mann-Whitney U tests and descriptive statistics. Institutional-level representation of women in leadership roles was also analyzed. Women held significantly lower academic ranks than males and were underrepresented in departmental leadership roles. Despite achieving assistant and full professorships earlier, women were overall less likely to reach these positions. Males exhibited higher time-adjusted H-index and citation rates (p < .0001), with a compounded 3.5-year publication gap. Institutional analysis revealed stark variability: 38 institutions had no women in MD/PhD leadership roles, while fewer than 20 percent achieved gender parity. Gender disparities in academic medicine cannot be explained by productivity alone. Structural barriers, opaque promotion criteria, and institutional cultures continue to impede women's advancement and leadership. Addressing these inequities requires transparent policies, targeted mentorship, equity audits, and inclusive leadership pathways to support a more equitable academic workforce.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Advancing gender equity in gynecology and obstetrics: perspectives from the German workforce Open PDF 
    (Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-08-27)
    Neuhold, Jasmin
    ;
    von Versen-Höynck, Frauke
    PURPOSE: Despite the high proportion of women in medical education and clinical training, female physicians remain underrepresented in leadership and academic positions in Gynecology and Obstetrics in Germany. This study investigates structural and cultural factors contributing to this disparity and highlights trends in workforce composition and recognition in the field. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional analysis using publicly available data from the German Federal Statistical Office and the German Medical Association (2004-2024), as well as database from the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG). RESULTS: In 2023, women comprised 73% of gynecologists in Germany. Female representation declined with advancing career stage. In 2024, 82% of resident physicians at German university hospitals were women, while they held 26% of department head positions in Gynecology and Obstetrics. Female membership in the DGGG reached 75%, with 40% on the executive board. In 2022, 65% of major awards went to men, while women received most poster and lecture prizes (61%) at the biannual conference. CONCLUSIONS: While gender diversity in the clinical workforce has improved, systemic inequities persist in academic and leadership domains. Addressing these requires structural reforms, increased transparency in recruitment and promotion processes, and targeted programs supporting women's professional advancement. Enhanced visibility, mentorship, and inclusive institutional policies are essential to ensure gender-equitable development in the specialty.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Career success for women in academic medicine: eight self-help strategies Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-04)
    Mehta, Sangeeta
    ;
    Barrett, Kali
    ;
    Menon, Kusum
    Women in academic medicine encounter unique challenges, including implicit biases. They are underrepresented in scholarly activities, including as authors, editorial board members, conference speakers, and guideline panels. In this special article, we suggest eight strategies that women can use to ensure their voices are heard and to reduce the overall gender disparity in academic medicine. These include crafting an academic mission, celebrating successes, building a community, recognising implicit biases, taking risks, exploring creative work-life integration strategies, and learning from mistakes.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The Status of Women in Academic Medicine, and Particularly in Neurosurgery, in a Developing Country, Türkiye Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2026-02)
    Aslan, Ayfer
    ;
    Bulduk, Erkut B.
    OBJECTIVE: Women have always faced inequality in academic medical careers in Türkiye as well as the rest of the world. However, to date, no definitive data has been published regarding the representation rate of women in academic medicine in Türkiye. The aim of this study is to reveal the status of women in faculty and leadership positions in academic medicine in Türkiye. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational study conducted through websites of the Council of Higher Education (YOK) in Türkiye and medical faculties accredited by YOK as of October 2025. RESULTS: There were 132 medical schools in Türkiye. Women constituted 41% of all faculty members, 37% of professors, 42% of associate professors, 44% of assistant professors, 57% of lecturers, and 50% of residents in medical faculties in Türkiye. Among leadership positions, there were 26 (21%) women deans, and 98 (46%) women vice deans. Women comprised 35% of the faculty administrative committees and 35% of faculty boards. 25% of chairpersons of medical sciences divisions, and 35% of department heads were women. Regarding women in Neurosurgery, only 6% (n=25) of faculty and 5% (n=5) of department heads in neurosurgery were women. Among neurosurgery faculty, women comprised only 2% (n=3) of full professors, 6% (n=5) of associate professors, 9% (n=14) of assistant professors, and 27% (n=3) of lecturers. There were 45 (28%) female residents in neurosurgery. CONCLUSIONS: Gender equity has not yet been achieved in academic medicine in Türkiye. More effective policies promoting gender equality should be implemented by the authorities.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Research Conducted in Women Was Deemed More Impactful but Less Publishable than the Same Research Conducted in Men Open PDF 
    (Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers, 2021)
    Murrar, Sohad
    ;
    Johnson, Paula A.
    ;
    Lee, You-Geon
    ;
    Carnes, Molly
    Background: Female scientists, who are more likely than their male counterparts to study women and report findings by sex/gender, fare worse in the article peer review process. It is unknown whether the gender of research participants influences the recommendation to publish an article describing the study. Materials and Methods: Reviewers were randomly assigned to evaluate one of three versions of an article abstract describing a clinical study conducted in men, women, or individuals. Reviewers assessed the study's scientific rigor, its level of contribution to medical science, and whether they would recommend publishing the full article. Responses were analyzed with logistic regression controlling for reviewer background variables, including sex and experience level. Results: There was no significant difference in perceived research rigor by abstract condition; contribution to medical science was perceived to be greater for research conducted in women than men (odds ratio = 1.7; p = 0.030). Nevertheless, reviewers were almost twice as likely to recommend publication for research conducted in men than the same research conducted in women (predicted probability 0.606 vs. 0.322; p = 0.000). Conclusions: These results are consistent with abundant data from multiple sources showing a lower societal value placed on women than men. Because female investigators are more likely than male investigators to study women, our findings suggest a previously unrecognized bias that could contribute to gender asymmetries in the publication outcomes of peer review. This pro-male publication bias could be an additional barrier to leadership attainment for women in academic medicine and the advancement of women's health.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Representation of women as editors in dermatology journals: A comprehensive review Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Lobl, Marissa
    ;
    Grinnell, Madison
    ;
    Higgins, Shauna
    ;
    Yost, Kelli
    ;
    Grimes, Pearl
    BACKGROUND: Despite a substantial increase in the number of women matriculating into medical school, a gender gap still exists with respect to academic leadership positions. This gap is apparent in the field of dermatology, particularly in the composition of dermatology journal editorial boards. To address this gap, we must first acknowledge its existence, examine potential reasons for its existence, and propose strategies to narrow the gap. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to determine the representation of women as editors in dermatology journals. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed for dermatology journals indexed in Medline, Journal Citation Reports, Scopus, and Embase in August, September, and October 2018. The editorial board of each journal was analyzed for the number and percentage of male and female editors in four different positions. We verified the accuracy of editorial boards listed on publisher websites by emailing administrative personnel. We also recorded the number of years from terminal degree for editorial board members of the 10 journals with the highest impact factors using SCImago Journal Rankings. RESULTS: Women occupied 18% of editor-in-chief positions, 36% of deputy editor roles, 22% of overall editorial board positions, and 22% of other board roles. The average number of years since terminal degree was not statistically different between women and men, with women averaging 30.2 years and men averaging 28.0 years since completion of terminal degree (p = .27). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that women are underrepresented as editors at all levels in dermatology journals. This supports prior findings reporting a minority of women in academic leadership roles. Thus, although women have made major advancements in the medical field over the past century, there remains room for progress with regard to equal representation in academic leadership roles, including editorial positions, professorships, and department chair roles.
  • 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,
    Gender Disparity in Pediatric Surgery: An Evaluation of Pediatric Surgery Conference Participation Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Lee, SY
    ;
    Mor, S
    ;
    Lazar, SV
    ;
    Hassan, AS
    ;
    Farmer, DL
    Background: Leadership in academic conferences is an important factor for academic advancement. Underrepresentation of women in academic surgical conferences has been demonstrated in other subspecialties, but it has not been well-studied in pediatric surgery. Methods: This retrospective descriptive study analyzes conference participation at 2 national pediatric surgery annual conference programs from 2003 to 2022. Moderator, speakers, and research presenter sex was collected. The primary outcome was the proportion of female participants in each of these roles. Mann-Kendall trend test was conducted to assess for significance. Results: Across 29 meetings, a total of 523 sessions were examined. Overall, female participation in all roles increased from 2003 to 2022. There were statistically positive trends of female participation in leadership roles as moderator (p = 0.003) and speaker (p = 0.01), with moderator role demonstrating the largest proportional female increase over time - with a 7-fold increase from 7.1% in 2003 to 50.0% in 2022. There was also a significant increasing trend in female participation as research presenters (p < 0.01) from 25.4% to 46.4%. Conclusion: Gender representation in pediatric surgery conferences has improved over the last two decades. Women now represent approximately half of all participatory roles, and efforts to continue providing equal opportunities for women at pediatric surgery academic conferences should continue. Level of evidence: N/A. Type of study: Retrospective Descriptive. (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Has female authorship in family medicine research evolved over time? Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Jabbarpour, Y.
    ;
    Wilkinson, E.
    ;
    Coffman, M.
    ;
    Mieses, A.
    PURPOSE Studies conducted in medical fields other than family medicine show that gender differences in publication rates are pronounced in many, but not all, fields of medicine. Our objective was to assess possible gender differences in publication rates in family medicine journals. METHODS Using MEDLINE, we collected information on all journal articles published in 3 family medicine journals in the United States (Family Medicine, Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, and Annals of Family Medicine) during the period 2008 to 2017. Gender of first and last author for each article was assigned using first names. The gender breakdown of the editorial boards during this time period was also examined. RESULTS For the 3 journals combined during the period 2008 to 2017, 46.1% (1,209/2,623) of first authors were female, and 38.6% (857/2,223) of last authors were female. For all journals combined, there was a statistically significant increase in first authorship (43.2% in 2008 vs 52.1% in 2017; P<.001) and last authorship (28.8% in 2008 vs 41.8% in 2017; P <.001) over time. The editorial boards of the journals combined were 37.2% (279/749) female, and this did not increase significantly over the time period studied (35.5% in 2008 vs 39.2% in 2017; P= .49). CONCLUSIONS Representation of female authors in family medicine journals is increasing, yet last authorship remains low, and there is variation between journals in terms of gender equity. Future studies can evaluate the reason for these differences and offer solutions to publications as they try to increase their female authorship. © 2020, Annals of Family Medicine, Inc. All rights reserved.
  • 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.