PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
18 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Factors that influence the implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in healthcare leadership: A meta-ethnographic study Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2022-09) ;Mousa, Mariam ;Skouteris, Helen ;Boyle, Jacqueline A. ;Currie, GraemeRiach, KathleenSummary Background Gender inequity in healthcare leadership persists and progress is slow, with the focus firmly on problems, barriers and on requiring women themselves to adapt and compete in a system not designed for them. Women are individually burdened to advance their careers, with little effort given to addressing systemic barriers in the health sector. A recent systematic review prioritised organisational-level approaches and demonstrated effective interventions. In this meta-ethnographic study, we further this work by examining factors in implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership. Methods The meta-ethnographic framework applied here follows the Noblit and Hare approach for synthesising findings and applying interpretive analysis to original research. We generated a new line-of-argument with insights for the healthcare sector. The protocol is registered (CRD42020162115) on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Three academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS) were searched systematically between 2000 and 2021. Studies were analysed if they included organisational-level interventions that sought to measurably advance women in leadership. Study characteristics were extracted using a standard template for intervention details. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data synthesis was conducted across 19 criteria of the Meta-Ethnography Reporting Guide (eMERGe). Findings Fifteen qualitative studies were included. Analysis revealed three meta-themes that are central to successful implementation of organisational interventions that advance women in healthcare leadership: (1) leadership commitment and accountability, influenced by internal and external organisational settings, salient for long term outcomes and for developing an inclusive leadership culture; (2) intervention fit with individuals with consideration given to personal beliefs, preferences, experiences, capabilities or life circumstances, including capacity for leadership roles in their broader life context; balanced against maintaining interventional fidelity, and (3) cultural climate and organisational readiness for change, addressing traditional, conservative and constrictive perspectives on gender and leadership in health, highlighting the facilitating role of male colleagues. Interpretation This meta-ethnographic research extends past work by integrating empirical evidence from a systematic literature review of effective organisational level interventions, with the identification of pragmatic themes to generate, implement, evaluate and embed evidence-based organisational interventions to advance women in healthcare leadership. This work can inform initiatives and policymakers to generate and implement new knowledge to advance women in healthcare leadership.Item type:Publication, Understanding the significant underrepresentation of women in radiology Open PDF(Elsevier BV, 2026-03) ;Peraka, Veena ;Raj, Karuna ;Champine, Julie ;Ozcan, BersuDogan, BasakThe aim of this systematic review is to highlight the reasons for a significant underrepresentation of women in radiology. We systematically examined the gender disparity within radiology across career stages, including medical school, residency training, and faculty positions. A comprehensive literature analysis was conducted to identify the determinants influencing female medical students' and physicians' pursuit of radiology. Despite women making up approximately half of medical school graduates, their representation in radiology remains disproportionately low. Contributing factors include a scarcity of female mentors and insufficient exposure to radiology during medical training, leading to persistent misconceptions about the specialty. Additionally, female radiology faculty members encounter challenges, including gender bias and difficulty advancing in leadership positions, which contribute to professional dissatisfaction. Strategies like the formation of Women in Radiology groups and institutional initiatives have been established to increase mentorship for female trainees and progression of faculty in their careers. The underrepresentation of women is a concern that warrants attention due to the unique collaborative and empathetic dimensions that women contribute to patient care and education. Throughout their careers, women encounter numerous obstacles that affect their exposure to, involvement in, and satisfaction with the field. Addressing these barriers is crucial for enhancing the presence and influence of women in radiology.Item type:Publication, An analysis of women’s authorship in five leading anesthesiology journals Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2024-12-20) ;Verleysen, Sören ;Janssens, Sander ;Bauters, Annemie ;De Hert, StefanMoerman, AnneliesPurpose Over the last decade, there has been an increasing interest in gender equity. The present study explored the gender gap in five leading anesthesiology journals worldwide, covering the period from 1980 to 2020. Methods We included all articles published in Anaesthesia, the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, and the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia in the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020, analyzing trends in women’s authorship. We explored its association with variables including study type, subspecialty, continent of the corresponding author, number of authors, and gender of coauthors. Results There was a significant increase in women’s authorship across all positions (first, second, and last) over the years (P < 0.001). Despite this progress, a substantial gender disparity remains evident. Women’s authorship positions were notably associated with the type of study, the subspecialty, and the continent of the corresponding author. There was a strong positive correlation (0.82) between the total number of authors and women’s first authorship position, whereas the correlation was negative (−0.54) for women’s last authorship position. Furthermore, women’s first and last authorship, as well as first and second authorship, were strongly associated, with odds ratios of 2.13 and 1.99, respectively. Conclusion The trajectory of women’s authorship in anesthesiology shows an upward trend, yet women continue to be underrepresented in the field. Particularly noteworthy is the finding that, when a woman is either the first or last author, there is a notable increase in the probability of having a woman as the second or first author, respectively. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for fostering inclusivity and diversity within the discipline.Item type:Publication, Expanding focus: reimagining and broadening women’s leadership programs in academic medicine Open PDF(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025-12-03) ;Iyer, Maya S ;Jagsi, Reshma ;Singer, Kanakadurga ;Overholser, BarbaraSpector, Nancy DIn light of increasing legislation aimed at prohibiting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts at publicly funded universities in the United States, women-only leadership programs (WOLPs) have come under increasing pressure, which could undermine gender equity advancements, particularly in academic medicine. Women-only leadership programs have traditionally offered a unique advantage for women over mixed-gender leadership programs by fostering psychologically safe spaces to share experiences, teaching leadership competencies while using a gender equity lens in areas where it makes sense, and providing essential support in the form of mentorship and sponsorship. Women-only leadership program participation is also associated with increased promotion rates, retention rates, and leadership roles. Given the current political environment, this is a pivotal moment—and a key opportunity—to elevate the work of WOLPs by expanding their reach to include all individuals who can benefit from their programming and help build a more inclusive and equitable field. To this end, WOLPs must reimagine, reframe, and rebrand their work to continue cultivating the future generation of health care leaders, focusing on a central tenet of WOLPs: different people have different experiences and are treated differently. As the national focus on DEI work evolves, it is imperative that WOLPs evolve and expand spaces for leadership development for all talented individuals to ensure that there continues to be progress in gender representation and leadership advancement.Item type:Publication, Open science, communal culture, and women's participation in the movement to improve science Open PDF(2020) ;Murphy, M.C. ;Mejia, A.F. ;Mejia, J. ;Yan, X.Cheryan, S.Science is undergoing rapid change with the movement to improve science focused largely on reproducibility/replicability and open science practices. This moment of change-in which science turns inward to examine its methods and practices-provides an opportunity to address its historic lack of diversity and noninclusive culture. Through network modeling and semantic analysis, we provide an initial exploration of the structure, cultural frames, and women's participation in the open science and reproducibility literatures (n = 2,926 articles and conference proceedings). Network analyses suggest that the open science and reproducibility literatures are emerging relatively independently of each other, sharing few common papers or authors. We next examine whether the literatures differentially incorporate collaborative, prosocial ideals that are known to engage members of underrepresented groups more than independent, winner-takes-all approaches. We find that open science has a more connected, collaborative structure than does reproducibility. Semantic analyses of paper abstracts reveal that these literatures have adopted different cultural frames: open science includes more explicitly communal and prosocial language than does reproducibility. Finally, consistent with literature suggesting the diversity benefits of communal and prosocial purposes, we find that women publish more frequently in high-status author positions (first or last) within open science (vs. reproducibility). Furthermore, this finding is further patterned by team size and time. Women are more represented in larger teams within reproducibility, and women's participation is increasing in open science over time and decreasing in reproducibility. We conclude with actionable suggestions for cultivating a more prosocial and diverse culture of science. © 2020 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.Item type:Publication, Persistent gender disparity in leading dental publications across 4 decades: an observational study Open PDF(2024) ;Moreno, Laura Barreto ;Franco, Marina Christ ;Karam, Sarah Arangurem ;van de Sande, Françoise HélèneMontagner, Anelise FernandesOBJECTIVES: This observational study assessed the differences in the gender of the first and last authors in the most-cited dental articles over the last 4 decades. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Articles were obtained through an electronic search of the most-cited articles in dentistry by decade (total n = 400 articles). The 100 most-cited studies in each decade (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019), with any study design, with results in dentistry were eligible. The gender of the first and last authors was determined using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution in general and across the 4 decades was performed with the Chi-square test, and the contribution of variables on the citation rate of articles was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: There were statistical differences between the gender distributions, with a predominance of men in the first (83.8%) and the last (86.8%) positions (P < .001). Over the decades, there was a tendency for an increase in the proportion of women as the last author (P = .002; Chi-square trend Test), with an increase of women from 6% to 22% across the last 4 decades. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the genders for the first author in the last 4 decades (P = .163; Chi-square trend Test). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that men lead a large percentage of the most-cited articles in dentistry and that this trend has not shown substantial modifications over the last years. Nonetheless, for the position of last authorship, an increase in women's representativity was observed over the last decades.Item type:Publication, Gender Disparity in Pediatric Surgery: An Evaluation of Pediatric Surgery Conference Participation Open PDF(2023) ;Lee, SY ;Mor, S ;Lazar, SV ;Hassan, ASFarmer, DLBackground: Leadership in academic conferences is an important factor for academic advancement. Underrepresentation of women in academic surgical conferences has been demonstrated in other subspecialties, but it has not been well-studied in pediatric surgery. Methods: This retrospective descriptive study analyzes conference participation at 2 national pediatric surgery annual conference programs from 2003 to 2022. Moderator, speakers, and research presenter sex was collected. The primary outcome was the proportion of female participants in each of these roles. Mann-Kendall trend test was conducted to assess for significance. Results: Across 29 meetings, a total of 523 sessions were examined. Overall, female participation in all roles increased from 2003 to 2022. There were statistically positive trends of female participation in leadership roles as moderator (p = 0.003) and speaker (p = 0.01), with moderator role demonstrating the largest proportional female increase over time - with a 7-fold increase from 7.1% in 2003 to 50.0% in 2022. There was also a significant increasing trend in female participation as research presenters (p < 0.01) from 25.4% to 46.4%. Conclusion: Gender representation in pediatric surgery conferences has improved over the last two decades. Women now represent approximately half of all participatory roles, and efforts to continue providing equal opportunities for women at pediatric surgery academic conferences should continue. Level of evidence: N/A. Type of study: Retrospective Descriptive. (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Item type:Publication, Contemporary psychology and women: A gender analysis of the scientific production Open PDF(2019) ;González-Álvarez, J.Cervera-Crespo, T.Despite important advances made in recent decades, women are still underrepresented in science (less than 30% of authorships). This study presents a bibliometric analysis of all the Psychology articles published in 2009 included in the Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters) in order to examine the contribution of women in contemporary Psychology, their pattern of research collaboration, the scientific content and the scientific impact from a gender perspective. From a total of 90,067 authorships, gender could be identified in 74,413 (82.6%) of them, being 40,782 (54.8%) male authorships and 33,631 (45.2%) female authorships. These data corresponded to 24,477 (49.9%) individual men and 24,553 (50.1%) women, respectively. Therefore, Psychology presents gender parity in the number of authors, and a gender asymmetry in the number of authorships that it is much lower than in science in general and other specific scientific fields. In relative terms, women tend to be concentrated in the first position of the authorship by-line and much less in the last (senior) position. This double pattern suggests that age probably plays a role in (partly) explaining the slight gender disparity of authorships. © 2017 International Union of Psychological ScienceItem 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, Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review Open PDF(2023) ;Tricco, AC ;Nincic, V ;Darvesh, N ;Rios, PKhan, PAObjectives To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research.Design Scoping review.Participants Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers.Primary and secondary outcome measures Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support.Results Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%).Conclusions Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity.