PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

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

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item type:Publication,
    Engaging and Empowering Future Female Surgeons: Development of the Medical Student Section of the Society of Women in Urology Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-10)
    Booher, Allison G.
    ;
    Vereecken, Sasha J.
    ;
    Kim, Erin
    ;
    Penmatcha, Neharika
    ;
    Aponte, Alexandra
    OBJECTIVE: To describe a replicable model for a large-scale, cross-institutional, and student-driven initiative to promote gender equity within surgical fields. METHODS: To address the lack of a national infrastructure to support female medical students pursuing careers in Urology, a historically male-dominated specialty, the society of women in urology (SWIU) established its medical student section, called SWIUdents, as a student-led initiative to offer mentorship, education, and networking resources for future female urologists. In 2022, SWIUdents convened its first medical student leadership board, comprised of two co-chairs and four subcommittees focused on membership, program implementation, mentorship, and community relations. SWIUdents membership was open to medical students of all gender identities, and recruitment for the organization took place via official SWIU communications, social media, and word of mouth. RESULTS: As of April 2025, there are 319 SWIUdents members, 195 of which are current medical students, representing all regional sections of the American Urological Association (AUA), as well as international medical students. In the 2024 to 2025 academic year, SWIUdents paired 87 medical students with resident or faculty members in Urology. SWIUdents also maintains an active social media presence and offers a broad array of programming, with robust attendance at monthly webinars and journal clubs. CONCLUSIONS: This paper outlines the development and infrastructure of SWIUdents, a national, student-driven model which may be replicated by other specialty organizations aiming to engage and empower women and other groups underrepresented within their respective field.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women in radiology: gender diversity is not a metric-it is a tool for excellence Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Kubik-Huch, Rahel A.
    ;
    Vilgrain, Valérie
    ;
    Krestin, Gabriel P.
    ;
    Reiser, Maximilian F.
    ;
    Attenberger, Ulrike I.
    Women in Focus: Be Inspired was a unique programme held at the 2019 European Congress of Radiology that was structured to address a range of topics related to gender and healthcare, including leadership, mentoring and the generational progression of women in medicine. In most countries, women constitute substantially fewer than half of radiologists in academia or private practice despite frequently accounting for at least half of medical school enrolees. Furthermore, the proportion of women decreases at higher academic ranks and levels of leadership, a phenomenon which has been referred to as a "leaky pipeline". Gender diversity in the radiologic workplace, including in academic and leadership positions, is important for the present and future success of the field. It is a tool for excellence that helps to optimize patient care and research; moreover, it is essential to overcome the current shortage of radiologists. This article reviews the current state of gender diversity in academic and leadership positions in radiology internationally and explores a wide range of potential reasons for gender disparities, including the lack of role models and mentorship, unconscious bias and generational changes in attitudes about the desirability of leadership positions. Strategies for both individuals and institutions to proactively increase the representation of women in academic and leadership positions are suggested. KEY POINTS: • Gender-diverse teams perform better. Thus, gender diversity throughout the radiologic workplace, including in leadership positions, is important for the current and future success of the field. • Though women now make up roughly half of medical students, they remain underrepresented among radiology trainees, faculty and leaders. • Factors leading to the gender gap in academia and leadership positions in Radiology include a lack of role models and mentors, unconscious biases, other societal barriers and generational changes.
  • Item type:Publication,
    13-Year Analysis of Gender Disparity in Peer-reviewed Burn Literature
    (2023)
    Khan, IF
    ;
    Ketheeswaran, S
    ;
    Willey, B
    ;
    Alasgarov, E
    ;
    Turker, I
    Women are less likely to be senior authors, invited to write in scientific journals, and to be cited in high impact journals. The aim of this study was to investigate trends in authorship and gender differences in peer-reviewed burn literature over 13 years. We performed a retrospective analysis of original research articles published from January 2009 to September 2021 in three burn journals. A gender determination application was used to categorize the gender of the first and senior author. Of the 3908 articles analyzed, 42.5% had a woman first author and 27.6% had a woman senior author. We identified 2029 unique senior authors, 29.0% of whom were women. Woman senior authorship was associated with increased odds of woman first authorship [OR = 2.31 (95% CI: 2.00, 2.67); P < .001]. The percentage of papers with a woman senior author increased from 17.8% in 2009 to 35.7% in 2021. If this 1.0% (95% CI: 0.50-1.51%) linear trend increase per year in woman senior authorship continues, we will expect to see equal proportions of woman and man senior authors in the included journals starting in 2037. The field of burn care is far from reaching gender parity with respect to authorship of peer-reviewed publications. Supporting and encouraging gender-concordant and discordant first:last authorship dyads in mentorship as well as redistributing obligations that may detract from authorship opportunities are potential ways to improve parity in authorship and academia.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The contribution of formal and informal mentorship to faculty productivity: Views of faculty in public affairs programs Open PDF 
    (Routledge, 2023)
    Scutelnicu Todoran, Gina
    This study examines how mentorship opportunities contribute to the productivity and career growth of public affairs faculty, stratified by gender and race. The study uses primary data coming from an original survey administered at two different points in time (2017 and 2021) to faculty who are part of NASPAA member schools. Results indicate that women and faculty from racially under-represented groups are more likely to receive formal mentoring whereas men and white faculty are more likely to benefit from informal mentoring. Additionally, results show that the relationship between mentoring approaches and research effort differed by the faculty’s member gender and race with formal mentoring contributing to the research effort of men and white faculty across all academic ranks and university types, and informal mentoring contributing to the research effort of mid-career faculty of all genders and races. This study aims to inform individuals and universities about mentoring trends and contributions.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Prevalence and Trends in Otology and Neurotology Publications Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Schauwecker, N.
    ;
    Kaplan, A.
    ;
    Hunter, J.B.
    Objective:To assess otology and neurotology authorship by gender, subject, and country of origin from 2000 to 2019.Study Design:Retrospective review of otology and neurotology publications in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2019 from 10 prominent journals within otolaryngology.Main Outcome Measures:Demographics for first through third and final authors, including gender, degree, coauthorship, as well as number of authors, subject matter, and region of origin for each publication.Results:A total of 4,411 neurotology articles published in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2019 were analyzed. During the study period, the proportion of female authors increased from 22.3% in 2000 to 33.9% in 2019 (p<0.0001). However, authorship position analysis demonstrated no increase in final female authorship (22.5% in 2019, from 19.4% in 2000, p=0.112). Geographic region analysis demonstrated a similar overall global trend toward an increase in female authors. When considering author gender by position, North America, the Middle East, and Africa failed to demonstrate significant increasing trends for female final authors. Female final authors were also significantly less likely to have medical degrees than final male authors, (37.4% versus 78.6%, respectfully, p=<0.0001). Finally, women published more often within the subjects of pediatrics and audiology (46.5% and 37.3% of final authors, p<0.0001).Conclusions:Female authorship in otology and neurotology has increased globally. With the predominant number of articles originating from North America, and articles originating from North America failing to demonstrate an increase in female final authorship, overall, final female authorship did not change during the study period.Professional Practice Gap and Educational Need:There is no comprehensive study exploring gender distribution within only the specialty of otology and neurotology. While it is known that more women are becoming otolaryngologists, it is unknown if this increase is reflected in otology and neurotology publications, domestically and internationally.Learning Objective:To understand if gender biases and/or differences exist within otology and neurotology publications.Desired Result:Identify trends in otology and neurotology publications to address particular barriers to female publication within the field. © 2021 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Bibliometric analysis of gender authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over 30 years of spine 1985 to 2015 Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Brinker, A.R.
    ;
    Liao, J.L.
    ;
    Kraus, K.R.
    ;
    Young, J.
    ;
    Sandelski, M.
    Study Design. A bibliometric analysis. Objective. The aim of this article was to study bibliometric changes over the last 30 years of Spine. These trends are important regarding academic publication productivity. Summary of Background Data. Inflation in authorship number and other bibliometric variables has been described in the scientific literature. The issue of author gender is taking on increasing importance, as efforts are being made to close the gender gap. Methods. From 1985 to 2015, 10-year incremental data for several bibliometric variables were collected, including author gender. Standard bivariate statistical analyses were performed. Trends over time were assessed by the Cochran linear trend. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. Inclusion criteria were met for 1566 manuscripts. The majority of the manuscripts were from North America (51.2%), Europe (25.2%), and Asia (20.8%). The number of manuscripts, authors, countries, pages, and references all increased from 1985 to 2015. There was a slight increase in female first authors over time (17.5% to 18.4%, P=0.048). There was no gender change over time for corresponding authors (14.3% to 14.0%, P=0.29). There was an 88% increase in the percentage of female first authors having male corresponding authors (P=0.00004), and a 123% increase in male first authors having female corresponding authors (P=0.0002). The 14% to 18% of female authors in Spine is higher than the ∼5% female membership of the Scoliosis Research Society and North American Spine Society. Conclusion. Manuscripts in Spine over the past 30 years have shown a significant increase in the number of authors, collaborating institutions and countries, printed pages, references, and number of times each manuscript was cited. There has been a mild increase in female first authorship, but none in corresponding authorship. Increases in female authorship will likely require recruitment of more females into the discipline rather than providing females in the discipline with authorship opportunities. Level of Evidence: N/A . Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.