PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Cross-Sectional StudiesViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Global

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • 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,
    “Breaking barriers: The power of self-efficacy in combating occupational stigma and advancing gender equity in nursing education” Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-06)
    Atta, Mohamed Hussein Ramadan
    ;
    Madkour, Asmaa Mohamed Ahmed
    ;
    Hamad, Nagwa Ibrahim Mohamed
    ;
    Abdallah, Haitham Mokhtar Mohamed
    ;
    Alkubati, Sameer A.
    BACKGROUND: Nursing students may encounter occupational stigma due to prevailing stereotypes and perceptions of nursing as a gendered and undervalued profession. Occupational stigma in nursing can contribute to decreased motivation, limited job satisfaction, and hindered professional growth, potentially impacting students' career choices and commitment to the profession. AIM: This research explores how self-efficacy can mitigate the effects of occupational stigma among nursing students and promote gender equity by encouraging both male and female students to pursue nursing confidently and with a sense of professional pride. METHOD: This study utilized a cross-sectional descriptive research design on 560 nursing students, which was conducted at the Faculty of Nursing, XXX University, XXX. Three validated instruments were used: The Nurse Occupational Stigma Scale, The Gender Equity Scale in Nursing Education, and The Student Self-Efficacy Scale. Multiple linear regression was conducted to identify predictors of occupational stigma and gender equity, with AMOS software used for mediation analysis. FINDINGS: Gender equity was negatively correlated with nurse occupational stigma (r = -0.124, p = 0.003), a positive correlation was found between gender equity and student self-efficacy (r = 0.098, p = 0.020), and nurse occupational stigma had a strong positive correlation with student self-efficacy (r = 0.345, p < 0.001). The structural equation model (SEM) suggests that self-efficacy contributes directly to perceptions of occupational stigma without mediation by gender equity. Significant predictors of gender equity included age (p < 0.001) and gender, with females reporting lower gender equity (p < 0.001), income level (p = 0.029), academic level (third level, p < 0.001), and self-efficacy (p = 0.002). For nurse occupational stigma, predictors included age (p = 0.023), income (p = 0.002), academic level (p < 0.001), and self-efficacy (p < 0.001). RECOMMENDATION: The findings of this study highlight the importance of fostering inclusive and equitable environments in nursing education and practice settings. Promoting gender equity may help reduce occupational stigma, thereby improving job satisfaction and retention rates within the nursing profession.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Editorial (Spring) Board? Gender Composition in High-impact General Surgery Journals Over 20 Years Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Harris, Chelsea A.
    ;
    Banerjee, Tanima
    ;
    Cramer, Monica
    ;
    Manz, Shannon
    ;
    Ward, Sarah T.
    Objective:  To quantify gender composition of 10 high-impact general surgery journals, delineate how board composition has changed over time, and evaluate qualification metrics by gender. Background:  Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards may contribute to the gender-based achievement gap in surgery. Methods:  We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the editorial board gender composition among 10 high-impact general surgery journals in 1997, 2007, and 2017. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to assess differences in editors’ H-indices, academic rank, and number of advanced degrees. Differences in editor turnover and multiple board positions were evaluated for each time interval. Results:  Over 20 years, the proportion of women on editorial boards increased from 5% to 19%. After controlling for time since board certification, no differences between men and women's number of advanced degrees, H-indices, or academic rank remained significant. Women and men were equally likely to hold multiple board positions (1997 P = 0.74; 2007 P = 0.42; 2017 P = 0.69), but men's editorial board tenure was longer across each time interval (1997–2007 P = 0.003; 2007–2017 P < 0.001; 1997–2017 P = 0.01). Conclusions:  Women surgeons have a small but growing presence on surgical editorial boards, and gender-based qualification differences are likely attributable to practice length. Men's longer tenure on editorial boards may drive some of the observed disparity by limiting new appointment opportunities. Strategies such as imposing term limits or instituting merit-based performance reviews may help editorial boards capture the field's changing demographics.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Parity Analysis of the Editorial Boards of Influential Dermatology Journals: Cross-Sectional Study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Szeto, Mindy D.
    ;
    Sivesind, Torunn E.
    ;
    Kim, Lori S.
    ;
    O'Connell, Katie A.
    ;
    Sprague, Kathryn A.
    This study underscores the persistent underrepresentation of women in academic dermatology leadership positions by examining the gender composition of editorial boards across top dermatology journals, emphasizing the urgent need for proactive strategies to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Representation in Authorship of Academic Dermatology Publications During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Szeto, Mindy D.
    ;
    Laughter, Melissa R.
    ;
    Maymone, Mayra B. C.
    ;
    Patel, Payal M.
    ;
    Sivesind, Torunn E.
    Analyses of women dermatology literature authorship from 2018 to 2022 reveal a slight increase in total female authors, female first authors, and female senior authors with no substantial immediate impact of COVID-19 on current trends, encouraging future examination of long-term effects and ongoing promotion of systemic initiatives to support gender equity.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Is there an editorial glass ceiling? Editorial leadership in nephrology and transplantation journals: A gender-based cross-sectional analysis Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Scarlato, Rose-Marie
    ;
    Wyburn, Kate
    ;
    Wyld, Melanie L.
    AIM: Editors-in-Chief (EiC) play a key role as gatekeepers in academic medicine, often shaping research agendas. Women have historically been underrepresented in editorial leadership roles in academic medicine. The purpose of this study was to examine gender representation among EiC of contemporary transplantation and nephrology journals. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated gender disparities among EiC of transplantation and nephrology medical journals. The study population was drawn from journals in two subject categories (1) 'Transplantation' and (2) 'Urology and Nephrology' in the 2023 Journal Citation Reports. Binary gender classification (woman/man) was determined by the names/pronouns used to describe the EiC on the journal or institutional webpage. The primary outcome was the proportion of women EiC. Secondary outcome was the proportion of women EiC based on journal topic, location and metrics. Descriptive statistics were used. Gender differences were compared using students t-test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 79 EiC were identified of which 16 (20%) were women and 63 (80%) were men (p < .001). Transplantation and nephrology journals had 21% and 20% women EiC, respectively. The proportion of women to men EiC was not impacted by journal category (p = .93), journal location (p = .61), journal impact factor (p = .71) or quartile (p = .59). CONCLUSION: There was a disparity in gender representation in EiC in nephrology and transplantation journals, with men holding 80% of all positions. These findings, among growing evidence of gender disparity, highlight a need for targeted efforts to promote gender equity in academic medicine.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Inequality in Leadership Positions in Neurology and Neurosurgery Journals and Societies Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Apaydin, Aydin Sinan
    ;
    Emekli, Inci
    OBJECTIVE: Gender inequalities persist in several areas of medicine, despite the growing number of female doctors and medical students. In this study, we aimed to reveal the gender inequality in the top journals' editorial boards and national societies' leadership positions in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. METHOD: This is a cross-sectional study that uses public information accessed through the internet via journals' and academic societies' public websites. The medical journals are selected and included according to their h5-index in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. We evaluated the gender composition of the editorial boards and academic societies' leadership positions. RESULTS: The female editorial board member ratio was 44.0% in the top 10 neurology journals. However, this ratio was significantly decreased to 29.7% in the other journals(P < 0.001). The top 10 neurosurgery journals had a female editorial board member ratio of 13.7%. This ratio was significantly decreased to 5.3% in the other 10 journals with lower h5-index(P < 0.001). A significantly lower number of female individuals are present in the editorial boards of the neurosurgery journals than in neurology(P < 0.001). The female president or delegate ratio was 19.3% in the World Federation of Neurology-affiliated countries, and it was 4% in the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies-affiliated countries. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there is a significant gender inequality among editorial board members. The position of neurosurgical societies and journals is far different than the field of neurology. Furthermore, these findings should be evaluated as a continuum of the gender inequality in the professional societies' executive boards and delegates representing the national academical community.