PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.RepresentationViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • 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, Marissa
    ;
    Khosa, Faisal
    Gender 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,
    A Data-Based Approach to Evaluating Representation by Gender and Affiliation in Key Presentation Formats at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Epidemiologic Research Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Nobles, C.J.
    ;
    Lu, Y.-L.
    ;
    Andriessen, V.C.
    ;
    Bevan, S.S.
    ;
    Radoc, J.G.
    The annual meeting of the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) is a major forum for sharing new research and promoting the career development of participants. Because of this, evaluating representation in key presentation formats is critical. For the 3,257 presentations identified at the 2015-2017 SER annual meetings, we evaluated presenter characteristics, including gender, affiliation, subject area, and h-index, and representation in 3 highlighted presentation formats: platform talks (n = 382), invited symposium talks (n = 273), and chairing a concurrent contributed session or symposium (n = 188). Data were abstracted from SER records, abstract booklets, and programs. Gender was assessed using GenderChecker software, and h-index was determined using the Scopus application programming interface. Log-binomial models were adjusted for participant characteristics and conference year. In adjusted models, women were less likely than men to present an invited symposium talk (relative risk = 0.60, 95% confidence interval: 0.45, 0.81) compared with all participants with accepted abstracts. Researchers from US public universities, US government institutions, and international institutions were less likely to present a symposium talk or to chair a concurrent contributed session or symposium than were researchers from US private institutions. The research areas that were most represented in platform talks were epidemiologic methods, social epidemiology, and cardiovascular epidemiology. Our findings suggest differences in representation by gender, affiliation, and subject area after accounting for h-index. © 2021 Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.