Progress on the health-related Sustainable Development Goals and targets in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, 2023: 2nd progress report

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes a vision of healthy lives and well-being for all at all ages. This major report provides an update on progress towards the health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region. It presents regional trends between 2010 and 2022 for 50 health-related SDG indicators using available data from WHO and estimates from other United Nations agencies. The report reveals some successes at the country level amid a marked slowdown regionally with setbacks across indicators on health health risks and determinants and access to services. We are at the halfway point for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: to reverse current trends and ensure the health and well-being of our population we must take bold steps now.

Gender Parity Analysis of the Editorial Boards of Influential Dermatology Journals: Cross-Sectional Study.

This study underscores the persistent underrepresentation of women in academic dermatology leadership positions by examining the gender composition of editorial boards across top dermatology journals, emphasizing the urgent need for proactive strategies to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Sex and gender-based analysis and diversity metric reporting in acute care trials published in high-impact journals: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise sex and gender-based analysis (SGBA) and diversity metric reporting, representation of female/women participants in acute care trials and temporal changes in reporting before and after publication of the 2016 Sex and Gender Equity in Research guideline. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE for trials published in five leading medical journals in 2014, 2018 and 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Trials that enrolled acutely ill adults, compared two or more interventions and reported at least one clinical outcome. DATA ABSTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: 4 reviewers screened citations and 22 reviewers abstracted data, in duplicate. We compared reporting differences between intensive care unit (ICU) and cardiology trials. RESULTS: We included 88 trials (75 (85.2%) ICU and 13 (14.8%) cardiology) (n=111 428; 38 140 (34.2%) females/women). Of 23 (26.1%) trials that reported an SGBA, most used a forest plot (22 (95.7%)), were prespecified (21 (91.3%)) and reported a sex-by-intervention interaction with a significance test (19 (82.6%)). Discordant sex and gender terminology were found between headings and subheadings within baseline characteristics tables (17/32 (53.1%)) and between baseline characteristics tables and SGBA (4/23 (17.4%)). Only 25 acute care trials (28.4%) reported race or ethnicity. Participants were predominantly white (78.8%) and male/men (65.8%). No trial reported gendered-social factors. SGBA reporting and female/women representation did not improve temporally. Compared with ICU trials, cardiology trials reported significantly more SGBA (15/75 (20%) vs 8/13 (61.5%) p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Acute care trials in leading medical journals infrequently included SGBA, female/women and non-white trial participants, reported race or ethnicity and never reported gender-related factors. Substantial opportunity exists to improve SGBA and diversity metric reporting and recruitment of female/women participants in acute care trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022282565.

Gender equality in medical research: A cardiology-informed examination.

Despite a perceived increase in attention to gender differences in medicine, a comprehensive assessment of gender equality research, particularly in cardiology, remains underexplored. This observational retrospective study, focusing on documents related to "Gender Equality" according to the Sustainable Development Goals, reveals cardiology as a significant area for gender equality research, albeit with a decline in publications post-2018. The analysis highlighted a concentrated effort in the United States and a considerable impact gap between gender-focused and general cardiology research. The global academic community must intensify research into gender disparities, which is essential for achieving professional gender equality and addressing the burden of cardiovascular diseases.

Professional's Views on the 'Nordic Paradox' in a Low Intimate Partner Violence Prevalence Country.

The apparently contradictory co-existence of high levels of gender equality and intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) found in Nordic countries has been termed the Nordic Paradox. The aim of this study was to examine how the Nordic Paradox is discussed and explained by Spanish professionals working in the IPVAW field. Five focus groups (n = 19) and interviews with key informants (n = 10) were conducted. Four main categories of possible explanations for the Nordic Paradox were identified: Macro-micro disconnect (i.e., discordance between individual beliefs and behaviors and macro-social norms of gender equality), IPVAW as multicausal (i.e., IPVAW defined as a multicausal phenomenon that does not necessarily have to be associated with gender equality), cultural patterns of social relationships (i.e., the role of social relationships and the way people relate to each other in the Nordic countries), and backlash effect (i.e., men's reaction to greater equality for women). Although this study does not provide a final explanation for the Nordic paradox, its results provide us with a better understanding of the phenomenon and can help to advance research in this field.

Building a workforce of diverse women leaders: Understanding intersectional identities.

BACKGROUND: Women have made significant advancements in the dentist workforce, growing from 20% of dentists in 2005 to 34.5% in 2020. Women have also made inroads in academic dentistry. While much scholarship has documented a growing feminization in dentistry and efforts to promote gender equity in the profession, there has been less exploration of the intersectional identities of these women. This manuscript explores how academic dentistry can support diverse women's leadership focusing on intersectional identities. METHODS: Applying the theoretical framework of intersectionality, we assess publicly available data to explore the percentages of faculty and deans who are women of color. Drawing upon best practices in higher education and our personal experiences, we explore opportunities to increase participation and support the advancement of women of color in academia. RESULTS: In the academic year 2018-2019, of the 5066 full-time faculty members, 40.5% were women. Minoritized women comprised 13.4% of full-time faculty members, compared to White women who were 20.6% of full-time faculty. Minoritized women comprised 7.3% of dental school deans, compared to White women who were 17.6% of deans. CONCLUSION: Intersectionality allows for a deeper examination of women in academic dentistry. Women of color are often erased in discussions about women in academic dentistry, even as the profession celebrates the progress made by women. Embracing the intersectional identities of women and by extension, people who identify as gender non-confirming may help dental schools to become humanistic environments where faculty and leadership represent the growing diversity in the profession and in the world.

Commitment to inclusion: The importance of collaboration in gender equity work.

Despite decades of faculty professional development programs created to prepare women for leadership, gender inequities persist in salary, promotion, and leadership roles. Indeed, men still earn more than women, are more likely than women to hold the rank of professor, and hold the vast majority of positions of power in academic medicine. Institutions demonstrate commitment to their faculty's growth by investing resources, including creating faculty development programs. These programs are essential to help prepare women to lead and navigate the highly matrixed, complex systems of academic medicine. However, data still show that women persistently lag behind men in their career advancement and salary. Clearly, training women to adapt to existing structures and norms alone is not sufficient. To effectively generate organizational change, leaders with power and resources must commit to gender equity. This article describes several efforts by the Office of Faculty in the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine to broaden inclusivity in collaborative work for gender equity. The authors are women and men leaders in the Office of Faculty, which is within the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine dean's office and includes Women in Science and Medicine. Here, we discuss potential methods to advance gender equity using inclusivity based on our institutional experience and on the findings of other studies. Ongoing data collection to evaluate programmatic outcomes in the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine will be reported in the future.

Gender-transformative programmes: a framework for demonstrating evidence of social impact.

Ample evidence has demonstrated that gender inequality and restrictive gender norms wield significant influence over health outcomes. While gender-transformative programmes have grown with the aim of challenging these norms and promoting gender equality, their effectiveness in driving sustainable norm change remains a subject of debate. This paper introduces a comprehensive analytical framework designed to assess the impact of these programmes.Drawing from extensive literature reviews of rigorously evaluated health programmes, this framework identifies four key dimensions that are instrumental in determining a programme's potential for transformative change. These dimensions are multiplicative effect, sustainability, spread and scalability. Multiplicative effect emphasises the interconnected nature of societal systems, positing that altering one element can trigger cascading effects throughout the entire system. Sustainability recognises that change within a system is less likely to revert once the structure has shifted. Programmes that facilitate norm change are more likely to sustain the changes brought about by their interventions. Spread acknowledges the importance of engaging entire networks that share the targeted norms. Successful programmes should demonstrate evidence of gender-related outcomes extending beyond the immediate beneficiaries, progressively diffusing through the broader population. Finally, scalability emphasises the need to bring gender-transformative initiatives to a larger scale to effect broader norm change.By aligning programme design and evaluation with these four dimensions, the proposed framework provides a standardised approach for assessing gender-transformative programmes. It shifts the focus from individual-level change to systemic transformation, bridging the gap between programmatic aspirations and the ability to measure genuine progress.

Development and validation of the Multidimensional Gender Inequality Perception Scale (MuGIPS).

Perceptions of gender inequality may motivate people to take action against inequality given its negative impact on various domains of people's everyday lives. Thus, it is crucial to develop reliable measures that consider the multidimensional nature of gender inequalities. In this research, we propose and assess the psychometric properties of the Multidimensional Gender Inequality Perception Scale (MuGIPS). This is a self-reported measure of perceived gender inequality in four domains: health, violence, household work and caregiving, and public sphere and power. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to test the validity and reliability of the MuGIPS with Spanish participants in three samples (N = 1733). The analyses revealed that the MuGIPS had a good internal consistency and showed four factors associated with gender inequality in the four specified domains. Moreover, scores in all the dimensions positively correlated with feminist identity and feminist ideology, as much as with some attitudinal variables. In contrast, results showed a negative correlation with system-justifying ideologies. The MuGIPS shows adequate reliability and validity for measuring the perception of gender inequality in the health, violence, household work and caregiving, and public sphere and power domains among Spanish university and general population samples.

Mind the Gap! Working Toward Gender Equity in Pediatric and Congenital Heart Disease: Present and Future.

Evidence from medicine and other fields has shown that gender diversity results in better decision making and outcomes. The incoming workforce of congenital heart specialists (especially in pediatric cardiology) appears to be more gender balanced, but past studies have shown many inequities. Gender-associated differences in leadership positions, opportunities presented for academic advancement, and recognition for academic contributions to the field persist. In addition, compensation packages remain disparate if evaluated based on gender with equivalent experience and expertise. This review explores these inequities and has suggested individual and institutional changes that could be made to recruit and retain women, monitor the climate of the institution, and identify and eliminate bias in areas like salary and promotions.

Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). METHODS: Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. RESULTS: We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

Closing the scissor-shaped curve: Strategies to promote gender equality in academia.

Gender inequality in STEM fields remains pervasive and undermines the ability for talented individuals to excel. Despite advances, women still encounter obstacles in pursuing academic careers and reaching leadership positions. This commentary discusses the "scissor-shaped curve" and examines effective strategies to fix it, including data-driven initiatives that we have implemented at our university.

Organizational commitments to equality change how people view women's and men's professional success.

To address women's underrepresentation in high-status positions, many organizations have committed to gender equality. But is women's professional success viewed less positively when organizations commit to women's advancement? Do equality commitments have positive effects on evaluations of successful men? We fielded a survey experiment with a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229) that varied employees' gender and their organization's commitment to equality. Respondents read about a recently promoted employee and rated how decisive of a role they thought intelligence and effort played in getting the employee promoted from 1 "Not at all decisive" to 7 "Very decisive" and the fairness of the promotion from 1 "Very unfair" to 7 "Very fair." When organizations committed to women's advancement rather than uniform performance standards, people believed intelligence and effort were less decisive in women's promotions, but that intelligence was more decisive in men's promotions. People viewed women's promotions as least fair and men's as most fair in organizations committed to women's advancement. However, women's promotions were still viewed more positively than men's in all conditions and on all outcomes, suggesting people believed that organizations had double standards for success that required women to be smarter and work harder to be promoted, especially in organizations that did not make equality commitments.

Advancing Gender Equality in Healthcare Leadership: Protocol to Co-Design and Evaluate a Leadership and Mentoring Intervention in Tanzania.

Background: Women constitute almost two thirds of the health and social workforce. Yet, the proportion of women in decision-making positions remains significantly low leading to gender inequities in access to and appropriateness of healthcare. Several barriers which limit women's advancement to leadership positions have been documented and they generally constitute of gender stereotypes, discrimination and inhibiting systems; these hinderances are compounded by intersection with other social identities. Amelioration of the barriers has the potential to enhance women's participation in leadership and strengthen the existing health systems. Objective: This protocol describes a proposed study aimed at addressing the organisational and individual barriers to the advancement of women to leadership positions in the Tanzanian health sector, and to evaluate the influence on leadership competencies and career advancement actions of the female health workforce. Method: The study utilises a gender transformative approach, co-design and implementation science in the development and integration of a leadership and mentorship intervention for women in the Tanzanian health context. The key steps in this research include quantifying the gender ratio in healthcare leadership; identifying the individual and organisational barriers to women's leadership; reviewing existing leadership, mentorship and career advancement interventions for women; recruiting programme participants for a leadership and mentorship programme; running a co-design workshop with programme participants and stakeholders; implementing a leadership and mentorship programme; and conducting a collaborative evaluation and lessons learnt. Conclusions: This research underscores the notion that progression towards gender equality in healthcare leadership is attained by fashioning a system that supports the advancement of women. We also argue that one of the pivotal indicators of progress towards the gender equality sustainable development goal is the number of women in senior and middle management positions, which we hope to further through this research.

Gender inequality in genitourinary malignancies clinical trials leadership.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 2 decades, there has been a growing interest in the significance of gender roles in healthcare and several efforts and initiatives have focused on increasing female representation in the medical field. Clinical trials play a very important role in shaping medical practice; moreover, the leaders of clinical trials often represent the upper echelon of researchers in any designated field. Presently, there is no data regarding women's representation in urological oncology clinical trials leadership. Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine the extent of female representation in leading urological clinical trials. METHODOLOGY: To thoroughly examine the representation of females as principal investigators (PIs) in urological cancer clinical trials between 2000 and 2020, we conducted a comprehensive search of completed trials focused on kidney, prostate, and bladder cancer on ClinicalTrials.gov. We extracted relevant information regarding the PIs and analyzed the data using univariate analyses to identify any significant differences between male and female PIs. RESULTS: A total of 9145 cancer clinical trials were conducted over the last 2 decades, and 11.3% (n = 1033) of them were urological cancer clinical trials. We were able to obtain detailed information about the principal investigators (PI) in 79.0% (n = 816) of the clinical trials, and we found that 16.8% (n = 137) of them were led by female investigators. Upon evaluating the characteristics of the PIs, female PIs had a significantly lower median age and median total citations as compared to male PIs (55.0 vs 59.0 and 5333 vs 7902; p-value < 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the termination rate, publication rate, funding source, cancer type, and the subject of conducting the clinical trials between male and female PIs. CONCLUSION: Between 2000 and 2020, only 16.8% of urological cancer clinical trials were led by a female PI, perhaps reflective of a low percentage of senior female researchers in the fields of urology, oncology and radiation oncology. Universities, research institutes and funding agencies should work to improve mentorship, representation and opportunities for female investigators to encourage more involvement for female researchers in these clinical trials.