Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Surg Res ; 295: 357-363, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38064976

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The percentage of women in surgical leadership roles is not commensurate with percent of women in field of surgery. Citation indexes are used as proxy for scholarly impact and may serve as an indicator of women's progress in academic surgery. We aimed to evaluate gender disparities in authorship of surgery manuscripts in high-impact journals. METHODS: In this bibliometric analysis of original research articles from four high-impact surgical journals from 2008 to 2010 (period A) and 2018-2020 (period B), the gender of primary and senior authors was assigned by Genderize.io. Number of citations per article was identified via Web of Science. Number of citations by gender of authors was compared across time periods. RESULTS: Of the 3575 articles (Period A = 1915; Period B = 1660), 962 (26.9%) had women as primary authors and 590 (17.2%) as senior authors. Over time, significant increases in women primary and senior authorship were noted from 22.8% to 31.7% (P < 0.001) and 13.9% (254/11,915) to 21% (336/1660), respectively (P < 0.001). Articles written with women primary authors had fewer median (interquartile range) citations than those by men as primary author in period A (39 [17-69.5] versus 42 [20.0-84.0]; P = 0.005). Gender parity was noted in period B (9 [4-19] versus 9 [4-20] citations; P = 0.307). In period A, articles written by women as both primary and senior authors had approximately 25% fewer median citations compared with those by men (34 [17-62] versus 44 [21-86]); P < 0.011), and this reached parity in period B (9 [4-20] versus 9 [4-21]); P < 0.658). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, gender authorship and citations parity are improving in high-impact surgery journals.


Asunto(s)
Autoria , Bibliometría , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Factores Sexuales
2.
Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle) ; 4(1): 162-168, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37096124

RESUMEN

Objective: To evaluate and compare parental leave policies from the top United States (US) hospitals with a focus on inclusivity of all types of parents. Methods: In September and October of 2021, the parental leave policies of the top 20 US hospitals, ranked by the 2021 US News & World report, were evaluated. Parental leave policies were obtained and reviewed through the hospitals' public websites. Hospitals' Human Relations (HR) departments were contacted to confirm the policies. Hospital policies were scored against a rubric created by the authors. Results: Among the top US hospitals (21 total hospitals), 17 (81%) had publicly available policies, and one policy was obtained by contacting HR. Fourteen of the 18 hospitals (77.8%) had a parental leave policy distinctive from short-term disability and offered paid paternity or partner leave. Thirteen hospitals (72.2%) offered parental leave for parents whose children were carried through surrogacy. Fourteen hospitals (77.8%) included adoptive parents; however, only five hospitals (27.8%) specifically included foster parents. The average paid leave for birthing mothers was 7.9 weeks compared to 6.6 weeks for nonbirthing parents. Only three hospitals offered the same leave for birthing and nonbirthing parents. Conclusion: While a few of the top 20 hospitals have paid parental leave policies that are inclusive and equivalent to all parents, many do not and represent an area for improvement. As healthcare industry leaders, these hospitals should strive for inclusive parental leave policies that care for their employees with the same high standards they set for caring for patients.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA