PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Gender DifferencesViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    COVID-19 effect on the gender gap in academic publishing Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Jemielniak, D.
    ;
    Sławska, A.
    ;
    Wilamowski, M.
    The authors wanted to verify a popular belief that women scholars have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied the first names of authors of 266,409 articles from 2813 journals in 21 disciplines, and we found no significant differences between men and women in publication patterns between 2021, 2020, and 2019 overall. However, we found significant differences in publication patterns between gender in different disciplines. In addition, in disciplines where the proportion of women authors is higher, there are fewer single-authored articles. In the multi-author articles if the first author is female, there is more gender balance among authors, although there are still fewer women co-authors. © The Author(s) 2022.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Scientists' genders and international academic collaboration: An empirical study of Chinese universities and research institutes Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Zhang, M.
    ;
    Zhang, G.
    ;
    Liu, Y.
    ;
    Zhai, X.
    ;
    Han, X.
    In the previous literature, no clear conclusions have been reached about the effect of gender differences on research performance (RP) in science, as measured by publication productivity, number of citations, and academic awards. Meanwhile, a gap also exists in the research regarding gender differences in international academic collaboration. To complement the existing literature, this study investigated the achievements of scientists engaged in international academic collaboration, which places heavy demands on language and communication skills and in which female scientists appear to have more advantages than male scientists. We investigated the effect of international collaboration carried out by chemists from China's Project 985 universities and the Chinese Academy of Sciences and compared the extent to which the international collaboration improved female and male scientists' academic performance. The results indicated that, compared to male scientists, female scientists performed better and significantly improved their academic performance through international collaboration. This conclusion was valid for different periods throughout chemists' academic careers. The policy implications are discussed at the end of this study. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in Faculty Rank and Leadership Positions Among Physician Biochemistry Faculty in North America: A Retrospective, Cross-Sectional Study
    (2021)
    Tiwana, Muhammad Haaris
    ;
    Sverdlichenko, Irina
    ;
    Xuan, Lisa
    ;
    Jalal, Sabeena
    ;
    Tiwana, Sabeen
    Purpose This study sought to assess gender differences among physician faculty in medical biochemistry and genetics programs in North America. It compared the distribution of academic and leadership ranks, years of active research, number of citations and publications, and Hirsch-index (h-index) by gender. Variable associations with the h-index were assessed. Method This was a cross-sectional retrospective study for which data was collected from June 2019 to October 2019 on academic and administrative physician faculty members for medical biochemistry and genetics programs. The website of Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database, Canadian Resident Matching Service website, and the medical biochemistry profile from the Canadian Medical Association to identify relevant programs and SCOPUS was used to gather faculty data. Results The analyses included 147 faculty members. More male faculty held higher academic rank positions and first-in-command leadership positions than female faculty. Men had more median years of active research, citation numbers, publication numbers, and h-index than women across all academic ranks. Upon performing multivariable linear regression, female faculty showed 0.39 times the odds of having a higher h-index than male faculty, keeping all other variables constant (p<0.01).  Conclusions In our study, it was shown that male physician faculty surveyed had higher performance than female faculty in academic rank and research productivity. Certain barriers may be contributing factors, including lack of mentorship or flexible institutional policies, women choosing clinical educator tracks, or gender bias. Considering the low retention rates of women in academic research, there is a need to address barriers in order to achieve gender parity.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Small female citation advantages for US journal articles in medicine Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Thelwall, M.
    ;
    Maflahi, N.
    Female under-representation continues in senior roles within academic medicine, potentially influenced by a perception that female research has less citation impact. This article provides systematic evidence of (a) female participation rates from the perspective of published journal articles in 46 Scopus medical subject categories 1996–2018 and (b) gender differences in citation rates 1996–2014. The results show female proportion increases 1996–2018 in all fields and a female majority of first-authored articles in two-fifths of categories, but substantial differences between fields. A paper is 7.3 times more likely to have a female first author in Obstetrics and Gynaecology than in Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine. Only three fields had a female last author majority by 2018, a probable side effect of ongoing problems with appointing female leaders. Female first-authored research tended to be more cited than male first-authored research in most fields (59%), although with a maximum difference of only 5.1% (log-transformed normalised citations). In contrast, male last-authored research tends to be more cited than female last-authored research, perhaps due to cases where a senior male has attracted substantial funding for a project. These differences increase if team sizes are not accounted for in the calculations. Since female first-authored research is cited slightly more than male first-authored research, properly analysed bibliometric data considering career gaps should not disadvantage female candidates for senior roles. © The Author(s) 2020.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Investigating gender differences in research performance of Iranian medical faculty members: A scientometric study
    (2021)
    Sofi-Mahmudi, A.
    ;
    Shamsoddin, E.
    ;
    Mesgarpour, B.
    ;
    Akhondzadeh, S.
    ;
    Kabiri, P.
    Background: Gender differences in scientometric indicators among medical faculty members in Iran was investigated. Methods: The Research performance of the faculty at all universities and institutes of medical sciences in Iran was assessed using the Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID) on June 12, 2021. Selected variables in our study were name, gender, university, degree, academic rank, type of faculty, the total number of articles, the total number of citations, self-citation percentage, h-index, citation per article, international cooperation percentage, and the number of research collaborators. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used. The extracted data were analyzed using R v4.0.1 statistical software. Results: A total of 21064 faculty members in 77 universities and institutes of medical sciences were registered in the ISID database, of which 12093 (57.4%) were men. Men faculty members outnumbered women in all academic ranks, except for the “instructor” rank (1134 female instructors against 835 male). In both sexes, most faculty members were assistant professors. There were more articles (346837 vs. 146024) and citations (5177060 vs. 1639246) by men than women. Among the 1789 faculty members with zero articles, 902 (50.4%) were men. One-hundred-and-fifty-four people were among ESI's top researchers' list, with a majority of men (124 people equal to 80.5%). The medians of all the scientometric indicators were higher in men than women. Men had a higher number of articles, the number of citations, h-index, citation per article, percentage of international articles, and co-authors, however, women had lower self-citations (1.56% vs. 2.51%). In all academic ranks, men had higher scientometric indicators. The only exception was the associate professors' self-citation, in which women's citations were higher than that of men (3.5 vs. 3.3). The highest mean h-index was in men with a Ph.D. in Pharmacy (13), men with a Ph.D. by Research (12) and women with a Ph.D. by Research (8.5), respectively. Conclusion: Gender differences were evident in research performance in Iran. Women faculty members of medical sciences in Iran generally had lower scientometric indicators. Copyright © 2021 Sofi-Mahmudi et al. Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Published by Tehran University of Medical Sciences.
  • Item type:Publication,
    An intersectional approach to analyse gender productivity and open access: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian National Research Council Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Ruggieri, R.
    ;
    Pecoraro, F.
    ;
    Luzi, D.
    Gender equality and Open Access (OA) are priorities within the European Research Area and cross-cutting issues in European research program H2020. Gender and openness are also key elements of responsible research and innovation. However, despite the common underlying targets of fostering an inclusive, transparent and sustainable research environment, both issues are analysed as independent topics. This paper represents a first exploration of the inter-linkages between gender and OA analysing the scientific production of researchers of the Italian National Research Council under a gender perspective integrated with the different OA publications modes. A bibliometric analysis was carried out for articles published in the period 2016–2018 and retrieved from the Web of Science. Results are presented constantly analysing CNR scientific production in relation to gender, disciplinary fields and OA publication modes. These variables are also used when analysing articles that receive financial support. Our results indicate that gender disparities in scientific production still persist particularly in STEM disciplines, while the gender gap is the closest to parity in medical and agricultural sciences. A positive dynamic toward OA publishing and women’s scientific production is shown when disciplines with well-established open practices are related to articles supported by funds. A slightly higher women’s propensity toward OA is shown when considering Gold OA, or authorships with women in the first and last article by-line position. The prevalence of Italian funded articles with women’s contributions published in Gold OA journals seems to confirm this tendency, especially if considering the weak enforcement of the Italian OA policies. © 2021, The Author(s).
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Difference in Research Productivity and its Associated factors in Addis Ababa University: a Cross-Sectional study
    (Addis Ababa Univ, Dept Community, 2021)
    Roro, Meselech
    ;
    Abebe, Workeabeba
    ;
    Wondimagegnehu, Abigia
    ;
    Nega, Adiam
    ;
    Girma, Selamawit
    Background: Gender equity movements have increased the number of women going to higher institutions. However, the number of women participating in research is limited in creating a critical mass. Objective: To assess the gender gap in research and its associated factors determinants among faculty at Addis Ababa University. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional study from October 2018 to March 2019 using a structured self-administered questionnaire University faculty who was lecturers and above level who served the University for more than a year were invited to participate in the study. Faculty were approached by data collection facilitators with graduate degrees and the secretory of the respective departments. We used descriptive and multivariate statistical methods to analyse the data. Result: Of the 888 study participants, 161 (18.1%) females faculty participated in the study. It was found that three hundred ninety-seven male academics (54.6%) and 50 female academics (31.1%) had ever published articles in peer-reviewed journals (p<0.001). Male faculty were more likely to publish in peer-reviewed journals than their female counterparts [AOR and (95% CI) [2.55 (1.68, 3.86)]. Faculty with a rank of assistant professors and above [AOR (95% CI) 3.47(2.31, 5.21)], those who have a Ph.D. as highest degree [AOR (95% CI) 2.98 (2.11, 4.19) and those who have affiliation with other institutions [AOR (95% CI) 2.59 (1.98, 3.56)], were more likely to publish in peer-reviewed journals than their counterparts. Conclusion: Female faculty were less likely to be involved in research than men counterparts. The University needs to narrow the gender gap in research by designing and implementing an appropriate intervention strategy.