PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
35 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Male-dominated participation in the first two years of medical school: A mismatch between reality and perception Open PDF(Informa UK Limited, 2026-02-26) ;Park, Connor C. ;Brendes, Keith D. ;Lundstrom, Karrie ;O’Neil, KileyJayaram, Maya A.Introduction: Although women now comprise most U.S. medical students, male physicians continue to dominate leadership roles, earn higher salaries, and hold more full professorships. These disparities suggest that cultural dynamics contributing to gender inequities may emerge early in medical training. This mixed-methods study investigated gender differences in perceived and actual participation in mandatory educational sessions during the first two years of medical school. Methods: First, a survey assessed student perceptions of gendered participation across mandatory first- and second-year educational sessions. Subsequently, these sessions were observed for eight weeks at a single institution. Observed sessions included full-class Didactic and Social/Ethical sessions (120 students) and smaller Clinical sessions (30 students). For each participation instance (asking or answering a question), the gender of the student and instructor was recorded. Students could opt out. Results: Survey responses indicated that most students perceived no gender-based differences in Social/Ethical or Clinical sessions. Female students, however, reported that men participated more frequently in Didactic sessions, while male students perceived no disparity (p = 0.001). Observational data showed male students accounted for 72.4% of 311 participation events (p < 0.001). Men contributed significantly more in Didactic (81.2%) and Social/Ethical sessions (67.1%; both p < 0.001), with no significant difference in Clinical sessions (54% male; p = 0.19). Male participation decreased in sessions led by female instructors compared with male (p = 0.036) or mixed-gender faculty (p = 0.023). Discussion: Despite objective gender disparities in participation, most first- and second-year students did not perceive differences. Notably, only female students perceived this discrepancy in their pre-observation surveys, and only in the context of didactic sessions. This imbalance may reinforce early professional norms favoring male visibility and engagement, perpetuating gender inequities in academic medicine. Addressing these dynamics is essential for fostering equitable learning environments and promoting diverse leadership in medicine.Item type:Publication, A longitudinal analysis of gendered career trajectories and academic efficiency in North American MD/PhD faculty Open PDF(Informa UK Limited, 2026-05-28) ;Quon, Stephanie ;Joseph, MarissaKhosa, FaisalGender disparities in academic medicine persist despite increasing women's representation in higher education. Prior research highlights the underrepresentation of women in senior ranks and leadership roles, yet few studies have assessed these disparities using time-adjusted productivity metrics. This study aims to evaluate gender-based differences in academic rank, scholarly productivity, and leadership representation among MD/PhD faculty in North America, accounting for career length and institutional variability. A secondary analysis was conducted on a dataset of 6,149 MD/PhD faculty from 122 accredited North American medical schools. Time-adjusted measures of productivity, H-index per year and citations per year, were calculated. Gender differences in rank, productivity, and leadership were assessed using Mann-Whitney U tests and descriptive statistics. Institutional-level representation of women in leadership roles was also analyzed. Women held significantly lower academic ranks than males and were underrepresented in departmental leadership roles. Despite achieving assistant and full professorships earlier, women were overall less likely to reach these positions. Males exhibited higher time-adjusted H-index and citation rates (p < .0001), with a compounded 3.5-year publication gap. Institutional analysis revealed stark variability: 38 institutions had no women in MD/PhD leadership roles, while fewer than 20 percent achieved gender parity. Gender disparities in academic medicine cannot be explained by productivity alone. Structural barriers, opaque promotion criteria, and institutional cultures continue to impede women's advancement and leadership. Addressing these inequities requires transparent policies, targeted mentorship, equity audits, and inclusive leadership pathways to support a more equitable academic workforce.Item type:Publication, Women Emergency Physicians and Gender Disparities from Entry to Advancement Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-07) ;Sethuraman, Kinjal N. ;Lall, Michelle D. ;Gorman, Emily F. ;Zeidan, Amy J.Agrawal, PoojaSTUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to summarize the last 20 years of published research on gender experience and disparities in the emergency medicine workforce. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE ALL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from 2003 to 2024, to identify original research investigating gender experience and disparities among physicians in emergency medicine in North America. We abstracted study design, sample characteristics, and outcomes. We analyzed data using an ad hoc iterative thematic analysis of the content areas as well as a synthesis of the key findings and research limitations. RESULTS: We identified 5,740 candidate publications and, after exclusions, included 191 (99% observational studies). We identified 15 themes: (1) workforce, (2) childbearing, (3) attrition, (4) evaluations, (5) bias and discrimination, (6) wellness, (7) professional development groups and mentorship, (8) authorship, (9) editorial board membership, (10) research grants, (11) national speakers, (12) awards, (13) leadership roles, (14) academic rank and promotion, (15) financial compensation and one subtheme (pediatric emergency medicine). We mapped these themes to 5 domains: (1) Recruitment and Retention, (2) Culture and Environment, (3) Academic Scholarship, (4) Recognition and Promotion, and (5) Clinical Care and Decisionmaking. There were 3 to 33 publications per theme. The quality of evidence was variable. We found fewer disparities, and improvement over time in the percentage of women academic faculty, women authorship, national speaking, and educational awards. We found consistent evidence of gender disparities disadvantaging women emergency physicians in financial compensation, editorial board membership, executive leadership roles, academic rank, and experiences of gender bias, with little change over time. CONCLUSION: Although some areas remain understudied, our central findings confirm that gender-based disparities continue to exist among emergency physicians. Future efforts should be redirected toward the development and assessment of interventions that combat these disparities.Item type:Publication, Authorship and citation trends in dementia research: A path to equitable career development for scientists Open PDF(Wiley, 2026-06) ;Viswanathan, Jayalakshmi ;Karamacoska, Diana ;Thakur, Lokendra S. ;Sawan, MounaGomez‐Arboledas, AngelaAbstract Introduction: Women are increasingly entering the dementia research workforce, but they frequently fail to attain senior leadership positions in academia. Discrepancies in academic research outputs were investigated to guide equity-focused policy recommendations. Methods: Bibliometrics was conducted on 400,482 original research articles (2003-2022) followed by surveying the AD/ADRD research community, to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate discrepancies in publication and authorship trends. In addition, an unsupervised learning algorithm was developed to analyze underlying relationships between author groups. Results: Male author gender was consistently predictive of better publication and citation metrics across all bibliometrics outcomes, with senior male authors outperforming all other subgroups and fewer senior female authors in most research areas. Female survey respondents reported more barriers, but comparable productivity and citation strategies as male authors. Discussion: Multi-pronged approaches by stakeholders across institutions, funders, and journals are necessary to provide career support for early-career scientists working to transition to senior research roles.Item type:Publication, Organizational and Systems-Based Framework to Guide a Departmental Approach to Academic and Leadership Advancement for Women in Emergency Medicine Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-06) ;Zachrison, Kori S. ;Kapanadze, Mariam ;James, Dara ;Al Jalbout, NourCash, Rebecca E.OBJECTIVES: To address gender disparities in career advancement in academic emergency medicine, we sought to identify specific and actionable approaches that an academic department could develop or enhance to create a sustainable pathway for advancement of women in academic and leadership roles. METHODS: This project took place in an urban academic department of emergency medicine and included 3 phases: (1) a literature review to assess the current landscape, (2) interviews with key informants, and (3) a consensus process to organize and prioritize strategies. RESULTS: Our literature review identified 55 manuscripts and key themes of mentorship, training, grant success, data and benchmarks, recognition, and institutional policies. Across 20 interviews with internal and external faculty members, themes that emerged were programs and training, barriers, facilitators, mentorship, and individual and system components. During our consensus review, potential strategies were organized by relative feasibility and importance. Ultimately, strategies for building standardized systems were prioritized for their achievability based on available resources and alignment with department priorities and policy. CONCLUSION: There are several strategic options that academic departments may pursue to address gender equity challenges. This includes building standardized systems to support equitable advancement of all faculty members across domains, including salary, support, and opportunities. Standardized approaches ensure that departments not only promote gender equity but also facilitate the professional growth and promotion of all faculty members.Item type:Publication, Career success for women in academic medicine: eight self-help strategies Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-04) ;Mehta, Sangeeta ;Barrett, KaliMenon, KusumWomen in academic medicine encounter unique challenges, including implicit biases. They are underrepresented in scholarly activities, including as authors, editorial board members, conference speakers, and guideline panels. In this special article, we suggest eight strategies that women can use to ensure their voices are heard and to reduce the overall gender disparity in academic medicine. These include crafting an academic mission, celebrating successes, building a community, recognising implicit biases, taking risks, exploring creative work-life integration strategies, and learning from mistakes.Item type:Publication, Gender representation trends in cardiothoracic surgery journal editorial boards Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2024-12) ;Higaki, Adrian Acuna ;Papageorge, Marianna V. ;Waldron, Christina ;Huggins, LeniqueBrinker, MorganObjective We aimed to characterize chronologic trends of gender composition of the editorial boards of major cardiothoracic surgery journals in the current era. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed of gender representation in editorial board members of 2 North American cardiothoracic surgery journals from 2008 to 2023. Member names and roles were collected from available monthly issues. Validated software programming was used to classify gender. The annual proportion of women representation was compared to the thoracic surgery workforce. Results During the study period, 558 individuals (3641 names) were identified, 14.3% of whom were women. The total number of editorial board women increased for both journals. The proportion of women also increased from 2.5% (3 out of 118) in 2008 to 17.8% (71 out of 399) in 2023 (P < .001), exceeding the percentage of women in the thoracic surgery workforce, which increased from 3.8% in 2007 to 8.3% in 2021 (P < .001). The average duration of participation was longer for men than for women (53.8 vs 44.5 months; P = .01). Women in editorial board senior roles also increased from 3.3% (1 out of 30) in 2008 to 28.6% (42 out of 147) in 2023 (P < .001), almost triple the increase in nondesignated roles from 2.3% (2 out of 88) in 2008 to 11.5% (29 out of 252) in 2023 (P < .001). Conclusions In recent years, the appointment of women to the editorial boards of high-impact cardiothoracic surgery journals and senior roles have proportionally exceeded the overall representation of women in cardiothoracic surgery. These findings indicate progress in inclusive efforts and offer insight toward reducing academic gender disparities.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, Representation of women among cardiothoracic surgery editorial boards: Trends over the past 2 decades Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2025-03) ;Stuart, Christina M. ;Mott, Nicole M. ;Mungo, Alison H. ;Meguid, Robert A.Mitchell, John D.Abstract Objective The objective of this study was to examine representation of women on the editorial boards of cardiothoracic surgery-focused journals over the past 2 decades to identify changes over time compared with women cardiothoracic surgeon and trainee representation, and to highlight additional opportunities for improvement. Methods The editorial boards of 2 high-impact cardiothoracic surgery journals were reviewed from 2000 to 2023. Data on editorial board positions, including editors-in-chief, associate/deputy editors, feature editors, and general members of the editorial board were abstracted. The proportion of women editors was assessed. Data were compared with publicly available information from the Association of American Medical Colleges on physician specialty by sex. Results Of 3460 editorial positions, 332 (9.6%) were held by women. Women occupied 2.2% (1 out of 45) of editor-in-chief positions, 13.2% (78 out of 592) of senior editor positions, 11.5% (33 out of 287) of feature editor positions, and 8.3% (221 out of 2663) of general editorial board positions. The proportion of women holding any editorial board position significantly increased from 2.4% in 2000 to 18.2% in 2023 (P = .01). Overall, editorial board representation increased at a rate of 0.7% ± 1.3% per year, not significantly different from the growth of practicing women cardiothoracic surgeons at 0.3% ± 0.5% per year (P = .584). Discussion Representation of women on the editorial boards of cardiothoracic surgery-focused journals has increased commensurate with the increasing proportion of practicing women cardiothoracic surgeons, although remains at 16%. Work remains to continue the recruitment of women to cardiothoracic surgery as well as to identify the key elements that can support them in positions of leadership.Item type:Publication, Authorship Trends of Women in Retina: A 25-Year Analysis Open PDF(2023) ;Nahar, A. ;Mahmoudzadeh, R. ;Rama, M. ;Soares, R.R.Yonekawa, Y.Objective: To examine the trends in first and last authorship of women within clinical retina research over the last 25 years. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants: First and last author names were retrieved from original articles published between January 1, 1995, and January 1, 2021, in the American Journal of Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology (Archives of Ophthalmology), Ophthalmology, and Retina. Methods: The medical subject heading major term “retina” was used in PubMed to filter publications specific to the field of retina. Publications by single authors and collaborative study groups and those classified as comments, letters, and editorials were excluded. First and last author names were obtained, and Gender API was used to assign sex. Names were crosschecked with the American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS) directory for United States–based authors. Main Outcome Measures: The proportion of male and female first and last authors throughout the study period and the association between first and last authorship gender were assessed. Results: A total of 4142 articles were included. The percentage of women in first and last authorship positions significantly increased from 23% to 37.7% and 14.2% to 24.6%, respectively, over 25 years (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). When the last authors were women, 32.5% of the first authors were women, and when the last authors were men, 27.1% of the first authors were women (P = 0.002). Based on the ASRS 2020 directory, 17% of practicing retina specialists in the United States were women in 2020. For publications in 2020, 28.2% of the first authors and 22.3% of the last authors of retina publications from the United States were women (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Although a disparity in authorship persists in the subspecialties of ophthalmology, this data suggest that retina is a field where the gap is improving. Mentorship by senior female authors is associated with a higher proportion of female first authors. © 2022 American Academy of Ophthalmology