PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, The Leadership Ceiling in Global Radiology: A 2024–2026 High-Throughput Algorithmic Audit of Gender Representation in Senior Authorship Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-07)Wang, Tanche (Jimmy)Rationale and objectives: To establish a 2026 global benchmark for senior authorship gender representation in high-impact imaging journals and identify structural barriers to digital metadata visibility. Materials and methods: An algorithmic audit analyzed 6454 publications from seven leading radiology journals compiled between January 2024 and February 2026. Senior author gender was inferred utilizing the validated gender-guesser name-inference engine. Pearson's Chi-squared test compared gender distributions across journals. A dynamic, web-based dashboard was developed using a Python-Streamlit framework to facilitate continuous, live data exploration. Results: The global female senior authorship rate across successfully classified data was established at 17.70% (1144/3717). Significant variation was found by journal (x2=34.19, p < 0.0001). The Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR) demonstrated the highest representation (37.17%), while technical subspecialty journals showed lower parity. A profound "Metadata Gap" was identified, with 42.42% (2737/6454) of the total cohort lacking identifiable gender markers or sufficient name strings in professional publishing summaries to allow for algorithmic inference. Conclusion: A profound gender gap persists in global senior research leadership within imaging specialties. Enhancing publishing metadata hygiene is an essential step for accurate institutional equity tracking. Informatics-driven auditing via live dashboards provides a scalable roadmap for modern departmental and institutional accountability.Item type:Publication, Investigating Career Advancement in Academic Cytopathology Workforce: A Gender and Regional Comparison Open PDF(Wiley, 2025-04-10) ;Chiou, Paul Z. ;Jia, YuaneVinod, RemaABSTRACT Objective Using bibliometric analysis to inform factors impacting career mobility, focusing on gender and regional variations in academic cytopathology. Methods The Scopus database was used to determine the productivity and experience of cytopathologists who are faculty from the 92 fellowship programs. The dependent variable was promotion to the rank of Professor. A regression analysis was conducted with productivity (h‐index), experience (years in publication) and one's geographic work location as covariates to investigate the role of gender in promotion. Results The gender distribution is skewed towards females at the Assistant (62.4% vs. 37.58%) and Associate Professors (70.51% vs. 29.49%) levels, but the gap narrows at the full‐professor rank (52.98% vs. 47.02%). The regression model showed significant regional variation in promotion for the Southern (0.35; 95% CI, 0.16–0.79; p = 0.012) and Northeastern (0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.57; p = 0.001) regions compared to the West. Active years of publishing (1.18; 95% CI, 1.11–1.27; p < 0.001) and productivity (1.09; 95% CI, 1.06–1.12; p < 0.001) were factors in promotion. The mean HI productivity was comparable between the males and females in the first (4.41 for males and 4.40 for females) and the second decade (13.81 for males and 12.84 for females). However, the gap widened into the third decade (30.27 for males and 26.40 for females), suggesting potential areas for improvement. Conclusion While the academic cytopathology workforce is progressing towards gender equity, there is still room for improvement. Our findings suggest that focusing on mid‐career professionals(between the second to third decades) by providing additional resources for research and facilitating work–life flexibility can help close the gender gap at the highest level.Item type:Publication, Gender differences in representation, citations, and h-index: An empirical examination of the field of communication across the ten most productive countries Open PDF(2024) ;Goyanes, Manuel ;Herrero, Esperanzade-Marcos, LuisWomen researchers have been shown to be underrepresented in science, especially among the most productive scholars. This is especially relevant in the social sciences and humanities fields, where gender parity is closer, but disparities among top scholars are still pronounced. The gender gap in the field of communication has been explored from several approaches, but studies focusing on gender differences in representation, citations, and h-index are rather scarce. Drawing upon data retrieved from SciVal, we conducted a comparative study of the top 500 and top 100 most productive scholars (N = 5000) for each of the ten most productive countries in communication research in the 2019-2022 period: the United States, the United Kingdom, China, Spain, Germany, India, Australia, Canada, Italy, and the Netherlands. The results indicate a consistent underrepresentation of women, particularly among the top 500, across countries. Despite women being cited more frequently than men in some countries over shorter time frames, a gender bias persists favoring men, particularly when considering the h-index. All in all, our study shows that, despite hints of gender equality in citation patterns, the gender gap still constitutes a structural part of the field of communication when addressing gender representation in research productivity and long-term dynamics of research impact.Item type:Publication, Accounting for gender research performance differences in ranking universities(2015) ;Abramo, G.D'Angelo, C.A.The literature on the theme of gender differences in research performance indicates a gap in favour of men over women. Beyond the understanding of the factors that could be at the basis of this phenomenon, it is worthwhile understanding if it would be appropriate to conduct the evaluation per population in a manner distinguished by gender. In fact, if there is some factor that structurally determines a penalization of performance by women researchers compared to men, then the comparative evaluation in the performance of organizations' that do not take gender into account will lead to an advantage for those that employ more men, under parity in the capacities of their staff. In this work we measure the differences in the performance and the rank of research institutions as observed when gender is taken into account compared to when it is ignored. The study population consists of all Italian universities and the performance measured in the hard sciences for the period 2006-2010.