PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.BiasViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Global

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Examining Differential Rater Functioning and Bias in the Holistic Review of Residency Applications Open PDF 
    (Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 2026-06)
    Barnes, Leandra A.
    ;
    Sebok-Syer, Stefanie S.
    ;
    Wind, Stefanie A.
    ;
    Nord, Kristin M.
    ;
    Laidlaw, Kathrina
    BACKGROUND: The impact of rater bias in applicant selection for residency interviews using holistic review is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To measure faculty raters' bias toward applicant gender and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status in their recommendations to offer residency interviews. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, applicant (n=3875) and faculty rater (n=69) data within a single institution's dermatology residency application database from 2014 to 2023 were examined for differences in rater judgments to interview applicants as measured by logits (ie, a standardized unit of scoring difference) using the many-facet Rasch model, a statistical method that accounts for variations among raters, applicants, and scoring for applicant gender (23% women, 14% men, and 63% unknown) and URiM status (26% White, 21% non-White non-URiM, 12% URiM, 41% unknown). RESULTS: Rater bias, as measured in logits using the rater severity measure, was minimal for applicant gender (-0.12, 0.08 logits) and URiM status (-0.07, 0.04 logits). However, raters were more lenient (ie, likely to favor an interview) when the applicant's and rater's gender (-1.74 logits, SE 0.05) or URiM status (-0.46 logits, SE 0.05) were concordant. Conversely, raters were more severe (ie, unlikely to favor an interview) when discordant on gender (1.74 logits, SE 0.05) or URiM status (0.46 logits, SE 0.05). More than 50% of individual raters exhibited substantial gender bias, and approximately 33% for URiM status bias when concordant. CONCLUSIONS: Raters were more likely to favor offering interview invitations to applicants with concordant gender or URiM status and less likely to favor interviewing applicants with discordant gender or URiM status.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Persistent gender disparity in leading dental publications across 4 decades: an observational study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Moreno, Laura Barreto
    ;
    Franco, Marina Christ
    ;
    Karam, Sarah Arangurem
    ;
    van de Sande, Françoise Hélène
    ;
    Montagner, Anelise Fernandes
    OBJECTIVES: This observational study assessed the differences in the gender of the first and last authors in the most-cited dental articles over the last 4 decades. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Articles were obtained through an electronic search of the most-cited articles in dentistry by decade (total n = 400 articles). The 100 most-cited studies in each decade (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019), with any study design, with results in dentistry were eligible. The gender of the first and last authors was determined using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution in general and across the 4 decades was performed with the Chi-square test, and the contribution of variables on the citation rate of articles was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: There were statistical differences between the gender distributions, with a predominance of men in the first (83.8%) and the last (86.8%) positions (P < .001). Over the decades, there was a tendency for an increase in the proportion of women as the last author (P = .002; Chi-square trend Test), with an increase of women from 6% to 22% across the last 4 decades. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the genders for the first author in the last 4 decades (P = .163; Chi-square trend Test). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that men lead a large percentage of the most-cited articles in dentistry and that this trend has not shown substantial modifications over the last years. Nonetheless, for the position of last authorship, an increase in women's representativity was observed over the last decades.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Bias in peer review Open PDF 
    (2013)
    Lee, Carole J.
    ;
    Sugimoto, Cassidy R.
    ;
    Zhang, Guo
    ;
    Cronin, Blaise
    Research on bias in peer review examines scholarly communication and funding processes to assess the epistemic and social legitimacy of the mechanisms by which knowledge communities vet and self-regulate their work. Despite vocal concerns, a closer look at the empirical and methodological limitations of research on bias raises questions about the existence and extent of many hypothesized forms of bias. In addition, the notion of bias is predicated on an implicit ideal that, once articulated, raises questions about the normative implications of research on bias in peer review. This review provides a brief description of the function, history, and scope of peer review; articulates and critiques the conception of bias unifying research on bias in peer review; characterizes and examines the empirical, methodological, and normative claims of bias in peer review research; and assesses possible alternatives to the status quo. We close by identifying ways to expand conceptions and studies of bias to contend with the complexity of social interactions among actors involved directly and indirectly in peer review.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Article placement order in rheumatology journals: a content analysis Open PDF 
    (British Medical Journal Publishing Group Section: Rheumatology, 2020)
    Stewart, Sarah
    ;
    Gamble, Greg
    ;
    Grey, Andrew
    ;
    Dalbeth, Nicola
    Objectives To analyse variables associated with article placement order in serial rheumatology journals. Design Content analysis. Setting Original articles published in seven rheumatology journals from 2013 to 2018. Primary and secondary outcome measures The following data were extracted from 6787 articles: order number of article in issue, gender of first and last author, geographical region, industry funding, research design and disease category. Cumulative density function plots were used to determine whether article placement distribution was different from the expected distribution. ORs for articles published in the first three places of an issue compared with the last three places were calculated. Altmetric Score and downloads were meta-analysed. Results Article placement order did not associate with author gender or geographical region but was associated with funding source and research design. In addition, articles about rheumatoid arthritis were more likely to be ordered at the front of issues (p<0.001). Articles about crystal arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, vasculitis, pain syndromes and paediatric rheumatic diseases were more likely to be ordered at the end of issues (all p<0.001). Association of article placement order with disease category was observed only in journals with tables of contents grouped by disease. Articles ordered in the first three places had higher Altmetric and download rates, than articles in the last three places. Conclusions Author gender and geographical region do not influence article placement order in serial rheumatology journals. However, bias for certain disease categories is reflected in article placement order. Editorial decisions about article placement order can influence the prominence of diseases.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender equity in epidemiology: a policy brief Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Aldrich, Melinda C.
    ;
    Cust, Anne E.
    ;
    Raynes-Greenow, Camille
    ;
    International Network for Epidemiology in Policy
    The under-representation of women in leadership in scientific fields presents a serious problem. Gender diversity is integral to innovation and productivity, and inequality leads to loss of gender talent in science including epidemiology. This policy brief summarizes some of the key dimensions and determinants contributing to gender-equity gaps in epidemiology and other scientific fields, relevant to developed countries where there is more published evidence. Women in scientific fields hold fewer positions on editorial boards, lack equal representation in speaking engagements at conferences, and are less likely to publish or receive top tier grant funding. Reasons for these inequities range from unconscious bias, biased promotion systems, and traditional norms in the division of family life and labor in our society leading to the attrition of women in academia. Addressing the problem of gender inequity, as a component of gender inequality, will provide an ethical basis to advance innovation. Data on gender equity in the field of epidemiology are sparse. We call on academic institutions, professional societies and associations, and editorial boards relevant to epidemiology (as well as other academic disciplines more broadly) to take meaningful action to build an evidence base as to the extent of gender inequities in epidemiologic research, teaching, policy, and practice. We outline some of the necessary steps required to achieve gender equity, such as career development and mentoring programs, institutional support, and programs to address bias.