PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
40 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Women in Surgery Open PDF(American Medical Association (AMA), 2006-04-01)Gargiulo, Debra A.HYPOTHESIS: Women are deterred from a surgical career owing to a lack of role models rather than lifestyle considerations. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: University teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Surgery and obstetrics/gynecology attending physicians, residents, and medical students. INTERVENTION: Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Potential deterrents to a surgical career. RESULTS: Men and women had a similar interest in a surgical career before their surgical rotation (64% vs 53%, P = .68). A similar percentage developed a mentor (40.0% vs 45.9%, P = .40). Women were far more likely to perceive sex discrimination (46.7% vs 20.4%, P = .002), most often from male attending physicians (33.3%) or residents (31.1%). Women were less likely to be deterred by diminishing rewards (4.4% vs 21.6%, P = .003) or workload considerations (28.9% vs 49.0%, P = .02). They were also less likely to cite family concerns as a deterrent (47.8% vs 66.7%, P = .02) and equally likely to be deterred by lifestyle during residency (83.3% vs 76.5%, P = .22). However, women were more likely to be deterred by perceptions of the "surgical personality" (40.0% vs 21.6%, P = .03) and the perception of surgery as an "old boys' club" (22.2% vs 3.9%, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Men and women are very similar in what they consider important in deciding on a surgical career. Women are not more likely to be deterred by lifestyle, workload issues, or lack of role models. However, the perceived surgical personality and surgical culture is a sex-specific deterrence to a career in surgery for women.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, Jasminvon Versen-Höynck, FraukePURPOSE: 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, Gender-specific career pathways after postdoctoral qualification in ophthalmology: status quo and influencing factors—A questionnaire survey Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-09-12) ;Maier, Anna-Karina B. ;Liekfeld, Anja ;Messmer, Elisabeth M. ;Brücher, Viktoria C.Vandemeulebroecke, NicolaZusammenfassung Hintergrund Trotz einer steigenden Zahl an Habilitationen in der Ophthalmologie von Frauen, sind Frauen in akademischen Leitungspositionen und bei Professuren weiterhin deutlich unterrepräsentiert. Ziel dieser Studie war es, den aktuellen geschlechterspezifischen Stand der Karrierewege nach der Habilitation in der Augenheilkunde sowie mögliche Einflussfaktoren zu analysieren. Methodik Eine offizielle Umfrage der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft (DOG), die an habilitierte Ophthalmolog*innen versendet wurde, erfolgte von August bis September 2024 auf Initiative des DOG-Arbeitskreises Frauen in der Ophthalmologie. Erhoben wurden Daten zu Alter, Geschlecht, Informationen zu Kindern, Kinderbetreuung, derzeitigem Arbeitsplatz und Gründen für den Verbleib und das Verlassen einer Universitätsklinik oder Forschungseinrichtung als Arbeitgeber. Ergebnisse Insgesamt beteiligten sich 168 von 458 habilitierten Kolleg*innen an der Umfrage (♀: 40 %, ♂: 59 %, keine Angabe: 1 %). Bei 79,8 % der habilitierten männlichen Kollegen lebten Kinder im selben Haushalt, bei Frauen nur in 64,7 % (p = 0,030); 81,8 % der Frauen und 32,9 % der Männer nahmen Elternzeit (p < 0,001); 72,3 % der Frauen und 6,3 % der Männer mit Kindern arbeiteten in Teilzeit (p < 0,001). Bei Vorhandensein einer zweiten Betreuungsperson arbeitet/arbeitete diese bei den männlichen Kollegen zu 58 % in Teilzeit und in 15 % gar nicht, während dies bei den weiblichen Kollegen nur zu 16 % in Teilzeit und zu 2 % gar nicht der Fall war (p < 0,001). Für den Verbleib in der akademischen Laufbahn wurden am häufigsten das Gesamtpaket der Vorteile einer akademischen Laufbahn (♂: 57,4 %, ♀: 64,4 %) und am seltensten finanzielle Anreize (♂: 2,9 %, ♀: 2,2 %) als Gründe angegeben. Diskussion Es besteht bei Habilitierten der Augenheilkunde eine erhebliche Diskrepanz zwischen gleich qualifizierten Männern und Frauen in Bezug auf die Übernahme der Kinderbetreuung. Frauen übernehmen offenbar den Großteil der Kinderbetreuung, was ein Grund dafür sein könnte, dass Habilitandinnen seltener akademische Leitungspositionen einnehmen. Abstract Background Despite an increasing number of women completing postdoctoral qualifications in ophthalmology, women remain significantly underrepresented in academic leadership positions and professorships. The aim of this study was to analyze the current gender-specific status of postdoctoral career paths in ophthalmology and potential influencing factors. Methods An official survey of the German Ophthalmological Society (DOG) was conducted from August to September 2024 at the initiative of the DOG working group on women in ophthalmology. Data were collected on age, gender, information about children, childcare, current employment and reasons for remaining or leaving a university hospital or research institution as an employer. Results A total of 168 of 458 colleagues participated in the survey (♀: 40%, ♂: 59%, no information: 1%). Of the male colleagues 79.8% had children living in the same household, compared to only 64.7% of women (p = 0.030), 81.8% of women and 32.9% of men took parental leave (p < 0.001) and 72.3% of women and 6.3% of men with children worked part-time (p < 0.001). If a second caregiver was present, this caregiver worked part-time in 58% of male colleagues and 15% did not work at all. In female colleagues the second caregiver worked part-time in 16% and 2% did not work at all. The overall package of benefits (♂: 57.4%, ♀: 64.4%) was cited most frequently as a reason for remaining in an academic career, while financial incentives (♂: 2.9%, ♀: 2.2%) were cited least frequently as reasons. Discussion There is a significant discrepancy between equally qualified men and women in ophthalmology regarding childcare responsibilities. Women appear to take on the majority of childcare responsibilities, which could be one reason why females are less likely to achieve academic leadership positions.Item type:Publication, Diferencias de género en Anestesiología. ¿En qué punto nos encontramos en España? Resultados de una encuesta nacional Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2020-08) ;Aliaño, M. ;Franco, G.Gilsanz, F.Resumen Objetivo En la última década se han publicado numerosos trabajos en los que se pone de manifiesto la persistencia de diferencias de género en medicina. La finalidad de este estudio fue investigar si este problema existe en la especialidad de Anestesiología en España. Métodos El estudio se llevó a cabo mediante una encuesta anónima que se distribuyó entre los especialistas en Anestesiología. El cuestionario estaba formado por 39 preguntas diseñadas para investigar la situación profesional, laboral y personal, así como las percepciones individuales en relación con la discriminación de género en el trabajo. Resultados Se incluyeron 1.619 encuestas, lo que representa el 17,6% del total de anestesiólogos de España; 654 participantes fueron hombres (40,4%) y 965 mujeres (59,6%). Las mayores diferencias fueron observadas en las siguientes áreas: el 70,0% de participantes informaron de que su jefe de servicio es un hombre. En relación con los puestos de liderazgo, el 25,2% de las mujeres que respondieron a la encuesta habían desempeñado algún puesto de confianza frente al 46,1% de los hombres (p < 0,001). En cuanto a la posición académica, el 10,3% de los hombres respondieron ser profesores de universidad en contraste con el 4,8% de mujeres (p < 0,001). El 46,0% de las mujeres que participaron en la encuesta piensan que existe discriminación de género en su profesión, mientras que solo el 12,6% de los hombres lo reconocieron. Un tercio de las mujeres (36,6%) consideran su condición de género una barrera para promocionar y tienen miedo de perder su trabajo por quedarse embarazadas. Además, tanto hombres como mujeres han presenciado un trato diferente por parte de pacientes y personal sanitario hacia sus compañeras anestesiólogas. Conclusión Los resultados de esta encuesta demuestran que existe una brecha de género en Anestesiología en España. En concreto, las mujeres están poco representadas en puestos académicos y de liderazgo, y un porcentaje considerable de encuestados perciben diferencias de género en el trabajo. Este estudio puede servir para monitorizar futuros cambios en nuestro país y como ejemplo para investigaciones en otros países vecinos. Abstract Objective Publications of diverse medical specialties confirm that gender differences still exist in the medical field. This particular study aims to investigate whether this problem exists in the specialty of Anaesthesiology in Spain. Methods An anonymous survey was distributed among anaesthesiologists in Spain. It had 39 questions and was designed to investigate professional position, work conditions, personal situation, and individual perceptions. The goal was to target the majority of anaesthesiologists working in Spain. Results Completed surveys were received from 1,619 respondents which represents 17.6% of the total number of anaesthesiologists in Spain; 654 respondents were male (40.4%) and 965 were female (59.6%). The greater differences were found in the following areas: 70.0% of the respondents advised that their head of department is male. When asked about management and leadership positions, 25.2% of female respondents had ever had any management role in contrast to 46.1% of men (p < 0.001). Regarding academic positions, 10.3% of male respondents are university professors in contrast to only 4.8% of women (p < 0.001). 46.0% of the women surveyed believe that gender discrimination exists in the workplace whereas only 12.6% of men reported the same. A third of women (36.6%) consider their gender a barrier to promotion and fear losing their job due to pregnancy. Furthermore, both genders have witnessed patients and colleagues treating staff differently according to gender. Conclusion The results of the survey show the existence of a gender gap among Spanish anaesthesiologists. Of particular note, women are under-represented in academic and leadership positions. Additionally, a considerable percentage of respondents perceive gender-based discrimination to be active in their workplaces. This study could serve as a template for future research in other neighbouring countries and as a means to monitor any changes in coming years.Item type:Publication, Are there gender differences in academic medical career aspirations related to research, mentoring and discrimination? A national cross-sectional study of French medical residents Open PDF(BMJ, 2026-05) ;Deledalle, Aurore ;Congard, Anne ;Bour, Valentine ;Sarda, ÉlisaCohen, FleurOBJECTIVES: Academic medical careers remain marked by persistent gender inequalities, despite the growing feminisation of the medical workforce. The objective of this study was to examine whether gender differences exist in key individual and institutional determinants of academic medical career aspirations among medical residents, including research motivation, mentoring, work centrality, self-efficacy, perceived discrimination and stress. DESIGN: This was a national cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: Multicentre study conducted across 36 medical schools in France. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1570 medical residents (997 women and 573 men) voluntarily participated between November 2022 and February 2023. All participants completed validated self-report questionnaires. There were no exclusion criteria beyond being enrolled in a French residency programme. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Attitudes towards research (interest, motivation, significance) were measured using the Scale of Attitudes towards Research. Mentoring was assessed with the Mentor-Mentee Perception Questionnaire, work centrality with Hirschfeld and Feild's scale, self-efficacy with the General Self-Efficacy Scale, perceived discrimination with the Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Experiences of Academic Medical Faculty instrument and stress with the Perceived Stress Scale. Gender differences were analysed using t-tests or χ² tests with Holm-Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Compared with men, women reported lower research motivation (mean (SD) 21.0 (5.5) vs 22.8 (5.5); padj=0.011), lower research interest (27.1 (5.5) vs 28.1 (5.7); padj=0.011), lower work centrality (26.7 (7.0) vs 28.2 (8.1); padj=0.011) and lower self-efficacy (28.3 (5.2) vs 29.9 (5.0); padj=0.011). Women were less likely to report having a mentor (38.5% vs 44.5%; padj=0.02). They also reported substantially higher levels of experienced gender discrimination (22.8% vs 3.8%; padj=0.005), sexual harassment (57.7% vs 18.2%; padj=0.005) and perceived stress (8.48 (3.29) vs 7.27 (3.43); padj=0.011) CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences were observed across several individual and institutional factors associated with academic medical career aspirations. Reduced access to mentoring and greater exposure to discrimination and stress among women may contribute to lower research motivation and self-efficacy. These findings highlight the need for institutional strategies addressing mentoring, workplace culture and equity to support gender parity in academic medicine.Item type:Publication, Inclusive universities: promoting gender equality and sex-gender diversity Open PDF(Frontiers Media SA, 2026-02-12) ;Sánchez Torrejón, BegoñaMachín Álvarez, MacarenaINTRODUCTION: This study investigates the implementation of gender equality and sex-gender diversity policies in a higher education context, within the G-FORCE Project funded by Erasmus+. METHODS: Two focus groups (N = 20) were conducted with participants from the academic community, administrative staff, research personnel, and external stakeholders, ensuring diverse generational and gender representation. Data were collected through guided focus group discussions, transcribed, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis with an interpretive approach. RESULTS: Three dimensions emerged: (1) knowledge and awareness of gender equality and sex-gender diversity, (2) institutional practices and university policies, and (3) university culture. Results indicate that although participants are aware of existing protocols and training, these initiatives are perceived as isolated, minimally innovative, and largely symbolic. CONCLUSION: A gap exists between formal policies and actual practices, reflecting a bureaucratic culture that limits inclusive transformation. Resistance is present among faculty and students committed to equality, yet systemic barriers persist. The study concludes that effective inclusion requires structural change, curricular integration of inclusive perspectives, creation of safe spaces, participatory governance, and alignment of institutional culture with gender equality and sex-gender diversity.Item type:Publication, Beyond the Scores: Gendered Interpretations of Emergency Medicine Resident Assessments of Interdependent Performances Open PDF(Ubiquity Press, Ltd., 2025-08-21) ;El Galad, Asil ;Sebok-Syer, Stefanie S. ;Panza, Michael ;Ng, KristenLingard, LoreleiPURPOSE: In medicine, gender bias and gendered language within assessments of individual performance are well established. Recent shifts toward assessing interdependence (the ability to work supportively and collaboratively within teams) demand we understand how gender bias and gendered language influence assessments. In exploring how faculty assess residents' interdependent performances, this study evaluated how gender-presentation influences faculty raters' assessments of residents' interdependence in Emergency Medicine (EM). METHODS: Using a multiple-methods (an experimental within-subjects study with follow-up interviews), 18 EM faculty from Canada and the United States assessed scripted videos of identical clinical encounters acted by male- and female-presenting residents. Faculty assessed female residents via anonymous online surveys and, six months later, assessed male residents via follow-up interviews using the same clinical scenarios. After every clip, faculty completed entrustable professional activity (EPA) and Milestone ratings and provided narrative justifications. Statistical analyses were conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to assess gender differences in EPA and Milestone scores. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring, gendered patterns in narrative justifications. RESULTS: Quantitative results revealed no gender differences in Milestone and EPA scores, except for the resuscitation entrustment rating, where male residents were rated less favorably (z = -3.09, p = 0.002). Qualitative findings uncovered subtle gender differences. For the same clinical performances, male residents were frequently described as leaders, while female residents as collaborative. Furthermore, male residents' help-seeking was framed as proactive, whereas female residents' help-seeking was indicative of lacking knowledge. Finally, bias was not consistent across genders: male leadership expectations could negatively flavor assessments of male collaborative performances. CONCLUSION: EPA and Milestone scores showed marginal gender-based differences, while narrative justifications reflected clear gendered expectations about residents' interdependence. These findings highlight the need for equity-oriented assessment practices that interrogate both the numbers and the narratives. As team-based competencies like interdependence become central to clinical training, ensuring that assessments reflect fair, unbiased interpretations are essential to supporting all learners equitably.Item type:Publication, Gender disparities in authorship in European cardio-thoracic journals Open PDF(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025-06-19) ;Galeone, Antonella ;Cleuziou, Julie ;Perrone, Fabiola ;Maffei, IreneFiorinelli, GiorgiaOBJECTIVES The goal was to evaluate gender authorship in 2 cardio-thoracic surgical journals. METHODS We performed a bibliometric analysis of all articles published from 2017 to 2022 in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Interdisciplinary Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. For each article, the gender and academic rank of the first, senior and corresponding authors were verified by Internet search, email contact or use of the application Genderize.io. Articles were categorized based on topic, type and country of origin. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to evaluate gender authorship trend over time. RESULTS A total of 5243 articles were included in the analysis. Women represented 18% of first authors, 7% of senior authors and 13% of corresponding authors; no trend was seen over time. Women represented 16% of first authors and 7% of senior authors in adult cardiac surgery, 23% of first authors and 9% of senior authors in congenital cardiac surgery and 19% of first authors and 8% of senior authors in thoracic surgery. Male first authors were more frequently full professors (17% vs 5%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%), and male senior authors were more frequently full professors (48% vs 31%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%) compared to female senior authors. CONCLUSIONS The proportion of female authors is significantly lower than that of male authors in highest-impact European cardio-thoracic surgery journals, and no significant increase in female authorship has been demonstrated in recent years. Increasing awareness of gender disparities is essential to facilitate equal career opportunities and academic advancement for women in cardio-thoracic surgery.Item type:Publication, Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (video interventions for diversity in STEM). Open PDF(2018) ;Moss-Racusin, Corinne A. ;Pietri, Evava S. ;Hennes, Erin P. ;Dovidio, John F.Brescoll, Victoria L.Gender biases contribute to the underrepresentation of women in STEM. In response, the scientific community has called for methods to reduce bias, but few validated interventions exist. Thus, an interdisciplinary group of researchers and filmmakers partnered to create VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM), which are short videos that expose participants to empirical findings from published gender bias research in 1 of 3 conditions. One condition illustrated findings using narratives (compelling stories), and the second condition presented the same results using expert interviews (straightforward facts). A hybrid condition included both narrative and expert interview videos. Results of two experiments revealed that relative to controls, VIDS successfully reduced gender bias and increased awareness of gender bias, positive attitudes toward women in STEM, anger, empathy, and intentions to engage in behaviors that promote gender parity in STEM. The narratives were particularly impactful for emotions, while the expert interviews most strongly impacted awareness and attitudes. The hybrid condition reflected the strengths of both the narratives and expert interviews (though effects were sometimes slightly weaker than the other conditions). VIDS produced substantial immediate effects among both men and women in the general population and STEM faculty, and effects largely persisted at follow-up. (PsycINFO Database RecordItem type:Publication, A “scientific diversity” intervention to reduce gender bias in a sample of life scientists Open PDF(American Society for Cell Biology, 2016) ;Moss-Racusin, C.A. ;van der Toorn, J. ;Dovidio, J.F. ;Brescoll, V.L.Graham, M.J.Mounting experimental evidence suggests that subtle gender biases favoring men contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including many subfields of the life sciences. However, there are relatively few evaluations of diversity interventions designed to reduce gender biases within the STEM community. Because gender biases distort the meritocratic evaluation and advancement of students, interventions targeting instructors’ biases are particularly needed. We evaluated one such intervention, a workshop called “Scientific Diversity” that was consistent with an established framework guiding the development of diversity interventions designed to reduce biases and was administered to a sample of life science instructors (N=126) at several sessions of the National Academies Summer Institute for Undergraduate Education held nationwide. Evidence emerged indicating the efficacy of the “Scientific Diversity” work-shop, such that participants were more aware of gender bias, expressed less gender bias, and were more willing to engage in actions to reduce gender bias 2 weeks after participating in the intervention compared with 2 weeks before the intervention. Implications for diversity interventions aimed at reducing gender bias and broadening the participation of women in the life sciences are discussed. © 2016 C. A. Moss-Racusin et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education.