PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

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

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Li, Ben
    ;
    Jacob-Brassard, Jean
    ;
    Dossa, Fahima
    ;
    Salata, Konrad
    ;
    Kishibe, Teruko
    OBJECTIVE: Many studies have analysed gender bias in academic medicine; however, no comprehensive synthesis of the literature has been performed. We conducted a pooled analysis of the difference in the proportion of men versus women with full professorship among academic physicians. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Education Resources Information Center and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 3 July 2020. STUDY SELECTION: All original studies reporting faculty rank stratified by gender worldwide were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study screening, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. RESULTS: Our search yielded 5897 articles. 218 studies were included with 991 207 academic physician data points. Men were 2.77 times more likely to be full professors (182 271/643 790 men vs 30 349/251 501 women, OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.57 to 2.98). Although men practised for longer (median 18 vs 12 years, p<0.00002), the gender gap remained after pooling seven studies that adjusted for factors including time in practice, specialty, publications, h-index, additional PhD and institution (adjusted OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.20). Meta-regression by data collection year demonstrated improvement over time (p=0.0011); however, subgroup analysis showed that gender disparities remain significant in the 2010-2020 decade (OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.48 to 2.80). The gender gap was present across all specialties and both within and outside of North America. Men published more papers (mean difference 17.2, 95% CI 14.7 to 19.7), earned higher salaries (mean difference $33 256, 95% CI $25 969 to $40 542) and were more likely to be departmental chairs (OR 2.61, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.12). CONCLUSIONS: Gender inequity in academic medicine exists across all specialties, geographical regions and multiple measures of success, including academic rank, publications, salary and leadership. Men are more likely than women to be full professors after controlling for experience, academic productivity and specialty. Although there has been some improvement over time, the gender disparity in faculty rank persists. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020197414.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender and Authorship in Pediatric Critical Care Randomized Control Trials∗ Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Xu, G.M.
    ;
    Zavalkoff, S.
    ;
    De Wildt, S.N.
    ;
    Duffett, M.
    Objectives: To examine the gender distribution of authorship of pediatric critical care randomized control trials. Data Sources: The 415 randomized control trials in pediatric critical care published before 2019. Study Selection: We included all randomized control trials enrolling children in a PICU. We used PICUtrials.net, which uses comprehensive search strategies of multiple databases, to identify published randomized control trials. Data Extraction: We manually extracted the name and profession of each listed author from each publication and classified each author as male or female based on their name. Results: We included 2,146 authors and were able to classify 1,888 (88%) as men or women. Overall, 38% of authors were women, this varied with the authorship position: 37% of first, 38% of middle, and 25% of last authors were women (p < 0.001). The three most common professions were physician (63%), nonclinician (11%), and nurse (6%) - of which 30%, 45%, and 97%, respectively, were women. The percentage of female authorship overall has increased from 28% in 1985-1989 to 39% in 2015-2018 (p for trend = 0.004). There were no significant differences in the characteristics of randomized control trials published with a female first or last author versus those with both male first and last authors with respect to the median number of children randomized (60 vs. 50; p = 0.41), multicentred trials (17% vs. 24%; p = 0.12), trials at low risk of bias (50% vs. 66%; p = 0.26), reporting any funding (55% vs. 51%; p = 0.66), or median number of citations per year (1.5 vs. 2.4; p = 0.09). Conclusions: Although increasing over time, the percentage of researchers publishing pediatric critical care randomized control trials who are women still lags behind the percentage clinicians who are women. Trials that female researchers publish are similar in characteristics and impact as male researchers. Further work should identify barriers to gender diversity and potential solutions in pediatric critical care research. © 2020 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Five Strategies Leaders in Academic Medicine Can Implement Now to Enhance Gender Equity Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Allan, JM
    ;
    Brooks, AK
    ;
    Crusto, C
    ;
    Feld, LD
    ;
    Oxentenko, AS
    Abundant disparities for women in medicine contribute to many women physicians considering leaving medicine. There is a strong financial and ethical case for leaders in academic medicine to focus on strategies to improve retention. This article focuses on five immediate actions that leaders can take to enhance gender equity and improve career satisfaction for all members of the workplace.