Gender Differences in Research Productivity among Academic Psychiatrists in Canada

Gender representation in Canadian surgical leadership and medical faculties: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Over the past two and half decades, Canadian medical school students have become majority female, and the medical workforce is therefore increasingly comprised of female physicians. Whether this change, however, has been reflected in the gender balance within medical school faculty positions and leadership has not been well studied in Canada.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examined the genders of full-time faculty members from the most recently available AFMC data, the current heads of departments of medicine and surgery from department websites and confirmed with respective universities.

RESULTS

Overall, women held 40.5% of full-time faculty positions in Canadian faculties of medicine. Female representation decreased with increasing academic rank, from 57.8% of instructors to 50.8% of assistant, 39.2% of associate, and 28.1% of full professors, respectively, with the greatest rate of increase over the past decade among full professors (0.75% per year). The heads of departments of family medicine were majority female (67%), and heads internal medicine at parity (50% female), consistent with numbers of practicing physicians. However, the heads of surgical divisions were majority male (86% overall). Accounting for the gender balance of practicing surgeons, male compared to female surgeons were 2.9 times as likely to be division head (95% CI 1.78-4.85, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Women remain underrepresented in Canadian faculties of medicine in leadership positions. Leadership in departments of surgery has particularly low female representation, even relative to the proportion of practicing female surgeons within the respective discipline.

Assessing the impact of Canadian primary care research and researchers: Citation analysis

OBJECTIVE

To describe the citation impact and characteristics of Canadian primary care researchers and research publications.

DESIGN

Citation analysis.

SETTING

Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 266 established Canadian primary care researchers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The 50 most cited primary care researchers in Canada were identified by analyzing data from the Scopus database. Various parameters, including the number of publications and citations, research themes, Scopus h index, content analysis, journal impact factors, and field-weighted citation impact for their publications, were assessed. Information about the characteristics of these researchers was collected using the Google search engine.

RESULTS

On average, the 50 most cited primary care researchers produced 51.1 first-author publications (range 13 to 249) and were cited 1864.32 times (range 796 to 9081) over 29 years. Twenty-seven publications were cited more than 500 times. More than half of the researchers were men (60%). Most were clinician scientists (86%) with a primary academic appointment in family medicine (86%) and were affiliated with 5 universities (74%). Career duration was moderately associated with the number of first-author publications (0.35; P=.013). Most research focused on family practice, while some addressed health and health care issues (eg, continuing professional education, pharmaceutical policy).

CONCLUSION

Canada is home to a cadre of primary care researchers who are highly cited in the medical literature, suggesting that their work is of high quality and relevance. Building on this foundation, further investments in primary care research could accelerate needed improvements in Canadian primary care policy and practice.

What factors are associated with the research productivity of primary care researchers in Canada? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Research evidence to inform primary care policy and practice is essential for building high-performing primary care systems. Nevertheless, research output relating to primary care remains low worldwide. This study describes the factors associated with the research productivity of primary care researchers.

METHODS

A qualitative, descriptive key informant study approach was used to conduct semi-structured interviews with twenty-three primary care researchers across Canada. Qualitative data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-three primary care researchers participated in the study. An interplay of personal (psychological characteristics, gender, race, parenthood, education, spousal occupation, and support), professional (mentorship before appointment, national collaborations, type of research, career length), institutional (leadership, culture, resources, protected time, mentorship, type), and system (funding, systematic bias, environment, international collaborations, research data infrastructure) factors were perceived to be associated with research productivity. Research institutes and mentors facilitated collaborations, and mentors and type of research enabled funding success. Jurisdictions with fewer primary care researchers had more national collaborations but fewer funding opportunities. The combination of institutional, professional, and system factors were barriers to the research productivity of female and/or racialized researchers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study illuminates the intersecting and multifaceted influences on the research productivity of primary care researchers. By exploring individual, professional, institutional, and systemic factors, we underscore the pivotal role of diverse elements in shaping RP. Understanding these intricate influencers is imperative for tailored, evidence-based interventions and policies at the level of academic institutions and funding agencies to optimize resources, promote fair evaluation metrics, and cultivate inclusive environments conducive to diverse research pursuits within the PC discipline in Canada.

The top-100 cited articles on post-traumatic stress disorder: a historical bibliometric analysis

This is a bibliometric analysis of the most-cited articles on post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the objective of identifying citation patterns for researchers, journals, centers, periods, topics, and nations. A search was conducted in Thomson Reuters' WoS Core Collection employing the expression TI = (posttraumatic stress disorder OR post-traumatic stress disorder OR PTSD). The 100 most-cited articles were downloaded, and the relevant data were extracted and analyzed. These studies had a total of 69,649 citations, ranging from a minimum of 360 to a maximum of 6029 citations, with an average of 696.49, a standard deviation of 720.92, mode of 369, and a median of 512. Eighty-eight percent of the most-cited articles on PTSD originated from the USA, with just six cities accounting for 52% of the publications and the Boston area alone responsible for almost one-fifth of the total output. The universities of Yale and Harvard headed the ranking of institutions with larger numbers of highly-cited articles. Female researchers represented 42.3% of all authors, 51% of the first authors, and 48% of the corresponding authors. The proportion of M.D. authors decreased significantly between the 1980-1999 (42%) and the 2000-2019 (27.2%) periods while that of Ph.D. authors increased from 44% to 57.4%. The most studied population was military veterans (28%). Female victims of sexual or physical violence, traumatized children, and adult survivors of childhood abuse were assessed in only 6-7% of the most-cited publications. Ten clinical trials evaluated psychological interventions but only three investigated pharmacotherapy. We concluded that influential research on PTSD remains centralized in the USA. A balanced gender representation in publications was found. There was a heavy reliance on combat veterans as the study population. Few highly-cited studies on the pharmacotherapy for PTSD were identified. Focused efforts are needed to address these challenges.

Gender imbalances in the editorial activities of a selective journal run by academic editors

The fairness of decisions made at various stages of the publication process is an important topic in meta-research. Here, based on an analysis of data on the gender of authors, editors and reviewers for 23,876 initial submissions and 7,192 full submissions to the journal eLife, we report on five stages of the publication process. We find that the board of reviewing editors (BRE) is men-dominant (69%) and that authors disproportionately suggest male editors when making an initial submission. We do not find evidence for gender bias when Senior Editors consult Reviewing Editors about initial submissions, but women Reviewing Editors are less engaged in discussions about these submissions than expected by their proportion. We find evidence of gender homophily when Senior Editors assign full submissions to Reviewing Editors (i.e., men are more likely to assign full submissions to other men (77% compared to the base assignment rate to men RE of 70%), and likewise for women (41% compared to women RE base assignment rate of 30%))). This tendency was stronger in more gender-balanced scientific disciplines. However, we do not find evidence for gender bias when authors appeal decisions made by editors to reject submissions. Together, our findings confirm that gender disparities exist along the editorial process and suggest that merely increasing the proportion of women might not be sufficient to eliminate this bias. Measures accounting for women's circumstances and needs (e.g., delaying discussions until all RE are engaged) and raising editorial awareness to women's needs may be essential to increasing gender equity and enhancing academic publication.

A Qualitative Investigation of Burnout and Well-being Among Faculty and Residents in a Canadian Psychiatry Department

OBJECTIVE

This study used semi-structured interviews with faculty and residents in psychiatry to inform a qualitative, process-based understanding of well-being and related concepts, as well as to identify and critically explore strategies for maintaining well-being in psychiatry.

METHODS

Using interpretive description as a qualitative research methodology, semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 12 faculty (nine clinical and three non-clinical) and five residents in a Canadian psychiatry department between September and December 2019, prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and subsequently analyzed for themes by the research team.

RESULTS

Fourteen women and three men completed the study, consisting of nine faculty members, five psychiatry residents, and three non-clinical PhD scientists. Four themes were developed from the interview data: (1) The nature of working in academic psychiatry, (2) professional identity as a double-edged sword, (3) feelings of isolation and powerlessness in the system, and (4) strategies to support well-being.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of many qualitative perspectives on well-being in academic psychiatry, the findings of this study can be used as a first step to inform future interventions and meaningful institutional change around well-being in psychiatry. The findings may help to enable conversations about well-being that embrace humanity and vulnerability as essential components of professional identity in psychiatry and provide opportunities for open discussion and support.

From pressure in the pipeline to accelerating ascension: a survey to understand professional experiences of and opportunities for Canadian women in the healthcare sector

BACKGROUND

Much has been written about the state and persistent lack of progress regarding gender equity and the commonly referenced phenomenon of a 'leaking pipeline'. This framing focuses attention on the symptom of women leaving the workforce, rather than the well-documented contributing factors of hindered recognition, advancement, and financial opportunities. While attention shifts to identifying strategies and practices to address gender inequities, there is limited insight into the professional experiences of Canadian women, specifically in the female-dominated healthcare sector.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of 420 women working across a range of roles within healthcare. Frequencies and descriptive statistics were calculated for each measure as appropriate. For each respondent, two composite Unconscious Bias (UCB) scores were created using a meaningful grouping approach.

RESULTS

Our survey results highlight three key areas of focus to move from knowledge to action, including (1) identifying the resources, structural factors, and professional network elements that will enable a collective shift towards gender equity; (2) providing women with access to formal and informal opportunities to develop the strategic relational skills required for advancement; and (3) restructuring social environments to be more inclusive. Specifically, women identified that self-advocacy, confidence building, and negotiation skills were most important to support development and leadership advancement.

CONCLUSIONS

These insights provide systems and organizations with practical actions they can take to support women in the health workforce amid a time of considerable workforce pressure.

The individual characteristics, organizational characteristics and research productivity of early career LIS researchers in China’s mainland: A crisp set qualitative comparative analysis (csQCA)

There existed discrimination, including gender discrimination, first degree discrimination, etc., when assessing the future research productivity of PhD graduates in recruitment in China’s mainland. Were PhD students who did not possess certain conditions (e.g. first degree receiving from a non-key university) unable to achieve high research productivity after graduation? Previous studies focused on the “net effects” of individual and organizational characteristics on research productivity by using quantitative methods (e.g. regression analysis). However, researchers’ research productivity might be due to the interactions of multiple factors rather than a single factor. This study aimed to analyze the effects of the combined conditions (interactions) of individual and organizational characteristics on the research productivity of early career library and information science (LIS) researchers under the context of employment discrimination in the academic job market of China’s mainland. Early career LIS researchers who graduated from China’s mainland universities/institutions between 2011 and 2015 were selected as the sample ( n = 62). csQCA was employed to analyze the data. The results revealed that the effects of a single condition did not directly contribute to the occurrence of high research productivity. There were two combinations of conditions that could contribute to the high research productivity of early career LIS researchers. The first combination that contributed to the high research productivity of an early career LIS researcher was receiving his or her bachelor’s degree from a key university, publishing higher than the median number of articles indexed by Web of Science core collections (WOS) during their PhD and working in a key university after PhD graduation. The second combination was being male, publishing more than the median number of articles indexed by the WOS and the local core journals index during their PhD, and working at a key university after PhD graduation.

Gender, Productivity, and Philanthropic Fundraising in Academic Oncology

BACKGROUND

Philanthropic donations are important funding sources in academic oncology but may be vulnerable to implicit or explicit biases toward women. However, the influence of gender on donations has not been assessed quantitatively.

METHODS

We queried a large academic cancer center's development database for donations over 10 years to the sundry funds of medical and radiation oncologists. Types of donations and total amounts for medical oncologists and radiation oncologists hired prior to April 1, 2018 (allowing ≥2 years on faculty prior to query), were obtained. We also obtained publicly available data on physician/academic rank, gender, specialty, disease site, and Hirsch-index (h-index), a metric of productivity.

RESULTS

We identified 127 physicians: 64% men and 36% women. Median h-index was higher for men (31; range, 1-100) than women (17; range, 3-77; P=.003). Men were also more likely to have spent more time at the institution (median, 15 years; range, 2-43 years) than women (median, 12.5 years; range, 3-22 years; P=.025). Those receiving donations were significantly more likely to be men (70% vs 30%; P=.034). Men received significantly higher median amounts ($259,474; range, $0-$29,507,784) versus women ($37,485; range, $0-$7,483,726; P=.019). On multivariable analysis, only h-index and senior academic rank were associated with donation receipt, and only h-index with donation amount.

CONCLUSIONS

We found significant gender disparities in receipt of philanthropic donations on unadjusted analyses. However, on multivariable analyses, only productivity and rank were significantly associated with donations, suggesting gender disparities in productivity and promotions may contribute to these differences.

Productivity and interdisciplinary impacts of Organized Research Units

Organized Research Units (ORUs) are nondepartmental units utilized by U.S. research universities to support interdisciplinary research initiatives, among other goals. This study examined the impacts of ORUs at one large public research university, the University of California, Davis (UC Davis), using a large corpus of journal article metadata and abstracts for both faculty affiliated with UCD ORUs and a comparison set of other faculty. Using regression analysis, I find that ORUs appeared to increase the number of coauthors of affiliated faculty, but did not appear to directly affect publication or citation counts. Next, I frame interdisciplinarity in terms of a notion of discursive space, and use a topic model approach to situate researchers within this discursive space. The evidence generally indicates that ORUs promoted multidisciplinarity rather than interdisciplinarity. In the conclusion, drawing on work in philosophy of science on inter- and multidisciplinarity, I argue that multidisciplinarity is not necessarily inferior to interdisciplinarity.

Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Gender gap in mental health research productivity: Results from Qatar

OBJECTIVES

Qatar's contribution to biomedical research has increased significantly in the past couple of decades, but the exact participation of women researchers remains obscure. This study aims to explore the gender gap in research production of Qatar in the field of mental health.

METHODS

The authors searched five databases for published articles from Qatar in the field of mental health from 2015 to 2019. The authors examined the retrieved articles for the gender gap in 1) the number of researchers. 2) the numbers of articles produced by men-only research teams vs. the research teams included women. 3) h-index. 4) foreign collaboration. 5) research design and themes.

RESULTS

The authors identified 152 published articles in the field of mental health. Men researchers outnumbered women researchers (124 vs. 81). Men had statistically significant higher h-index compared to women (14.6 ± 1.4 vs 4.6 ± 0.9; p < 0.001). Research teams that included women had produced fewer articles compared to men-only groups (41.4 %), they also had less foreign collaborators (68 % vs. 91 %, p = 0.001). They were less involved in experimental research and more involved in observational research compared to male-only research groups (15.90 % vs. 38.6 % and 47.6 % vs. 25 % respectively; p = 0.034). In articles with women authors, women were the first authors in 50.8 % of the articles, and men were the senior authors in 79.4 % of them.

CONCLUSION

The study identifies gender gaps in some aspects of research productivity in Qatar. This data will provide a benchmark for future research in the field.

Women's productivity in mental health research in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

OBJECTIVES

The productivity of women authors in the field of mental health in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries (GCC) is not known. This study aims to explore women's mental health research productivity in GCC countries.

METHODS

The authors searched five databases for published articles from the GCC region in the field of mental health between 2015-2019. The gender of the authors was inferred from the first name. The authors examined the qualified articles for women authorship, h-index, and research design.

RESULTS

The cumulative proportion of articles with women authors was 41.6 %. There was a significant difference across the countries; Bahrain has the highest percentage (79.3 %), while Oman had the lowest (33.8 %); p < 0.05. Out of the 428 articles that included at least one-woman author, 184 articles (43.0 %) had a woman first author, and 149 (30.4 %) had a woman as a senior author, the countries' variations were significant; p < 0.05. The majority of women authors, except Qatar, were affiliated to academic institutes. The mean h-index of GCC women authors was 4. Descriptive research was the most common research design in most countries apart from Qatar, where experimental research was dominant.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to review GCC women's research productivity in the field of mental health. Given the relatively short history of medical education and research in the region, the results appear promising, and the data generated shall serve as a foundation to promote further studies in the field.

Academic achievement and gender among adult critical care program directors

PURPOSE

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) program director (PD) qualifications includes scholarly activity with demonstrated academic productivity and dissemination. Our hypothesis: academic productivity among adult critical care medicine (CCM) fellowship PDs is affected by gender with women having lower productivity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PDs in 39 institutions with CCM fellowships in anesthesiology, surgery, and pulmonary medicine were analyzed using data from ACGME website, PubMed, and NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools. Primary outcomes were total publications and h-index. Secondary outcomes included NIH funding and past five year publications. Independent variables and covariates included gender, academic rank, year appointed as program director, years certified in CCM, and specialty.

RESULTS

PDs who were women had fewer total publications (median: 13 vs: 20, p = 0.030), past 5 years publications (median: 6 vs median: 9; p = 0.025), and less NIH funding (12% vs 32%; p = 0.046) compared to men. In exploratory analyses stratified by rank, assistant professor ranked women had fewer total (p = 0.027) and recent publications (p = 0.031) compared to men.

CONCLUSIONS

Women who were PDs had fewer publications and less NIH funding compared to men with differences in publications more prominent in early career faculty.

US Psychiatry Faculty: Academic Rank, Gender and Racial Profile

OBJECTIVE

The gender and racial underrepresentation persist in academic psychiatry faculty appointments. Our study investigated the gender and racial distribution and its temporal trends in academic psychiatry faculty positions across the USA over a 12-year period.

METHODS

Using the annual reports of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted. Simple descriptive statistics analyzed the time trends and the distribution of gender and race across academic ranks, tenure, and degree types.

RESULTS

Over the 12-year study period, the White race was the most represented at each rank. In the lower academic ranks, there was an increased representation of Asians, while the minority race/ethnicities experienced minimal increment. Similarly, males were overrepresented at higher academic ranks, with females increasing in proportion at lower academic ranks.

CONCLUSIONS

Females and minorities remain underrepresented in academic psychiatry faculty positions, especially among senior academic and leadership positions. Differences in tenure tracks and degree types may contribute to the overrepresentation of White and male academic physicians.

Gender Disparities in Invited Commentary Authorship in 2459 Medical Journals

Importance

In peer-reviewed medical journals, authoring an invited commentary on an original article is a recognition of expertise. It has been documented that women author fewer invited publications than men do. However, it is unknown whether this disparity is due to gender differences in characteristics that are associated with invitations, such as field of expertise, seniority, and scientific output.

Objective

To estimate the odds ratio (OR) of authoring an invited commentary for women compared with men who had similar expertise, seniority, and publication metrics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This matched case-control study included all medical invited commentaries published from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2017, in English-language medical journals and multidisciplinary journals. Invited commentaries were defined as publications that cite another publication within the same journal volume and issue. Bibliometric data were obtained from Scopus. Cases were defined as corresponding authors of invited commentaries in a given journal during the study period. Controls were matched to cases based on scientific expertise by calculating a similarity index for abstracts published during the same period using natural language processing. Data analyses were conducted from March 13, 2019, through May 3, 2019.

Exposure

Corresponding or sole author gender was predicted from author first name and country of origin using genderize.io.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The OR for gender was estimated after adjusting for field of expertise, publication output, citation impact, and years active (ie, years since first publication), with an interaction between gender and years active.

Results

The final data set included 43 235 cases across 2549 journals; there were 34 047 unique intraciting commentary authors, among whom 9072 (26.6%) were women. For researchers who had been active for the median of 19 years, the odds of invited commentary authorship were 21% lower for women (OR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.81]; P < .001) compared with men who had similar scientific expertise, number of publications, and citation impact. For every decile increase in years active, the OR decreased by a factor of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96-0.98; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this case-control study, women had lower odds of authoring invited commentaries than their male peers. This disparity was larger for senior researchers. Journal editors could use natural language processing of published research to widen and diversify the pool of experts considered for commentary invitations.