Literature DB >> 27759706

Advancing Women's Health and Women's Leadership With Endowed Chairs in Women's Health.

Molly Carnes1, Paula Johnson, Wendy Klein, Marjorie Jenkins, C Noel Bairey Merz.   

Abstract

Gender-based bias and conflation of gender and status are root causes of disparities in women's health care and the slow advancement of women to leadership in academic medicine. More than a quarter of women physicians train in internal medicine and its subspecialties, and women physicians almost exclusively constitute the women's health focus within internal medicine. Thus, internal medicine has considerable opportunity to develop women leaders in academic medicine and promote women's health equity.To probe whether holding an endowed chair-which confers status-in women's health may be an effective way to advance women leaders in academic medicine and women's health, the authors explored the current status of endowed chairs in women's health in internal medicine. They found that the number of these endowed chairs in North America increased from 7 in 2013 to 19 in 2015, and all were held by women. The perceptions of incumbents and other women's health leaders supported the premise that an endowed chair in women's health would increase women's leadership, the institutional stature of women's health, and activities in women's health research, education, and clinical care.Going forward, it will be important to explore why not all recipients perceived that the endowed chair enhanced their own academic leadership, whether providing women's health leaders with fundraising expertise fosters future success in increasing the number of women's health endowed chairs, and how the conflation of gender and status play out (e.g., salary differences between endowed chairs) as the number of endowed chairs in women's health increases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27759706      PMCID: PMC5473431          DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001423

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  42 in total

1.  Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms.

Authors:  Anne M Koenig; Alice H Eagly; Abigail A Mitchell; Tiina Ristikari
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Do students' and authors' genders affect evaluations? A linguistic analysis of Medical Student Performance Evaluations.

Authors:  Carol Isaac; Jocelyn Chertoff; Barbara Lee; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Is Adam worth more than Eve? The financial impact of gender bias in the federal reimbursement of gynecological procedures.

Authors:  B A Goff; H G Muntz; J M Cain
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Comparison of 1997 Medicare relative value units for gender-specific procedures: is Adam still worth more than Eve?

Authors:  B A Goff; H G Muntz; J M Cain
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 5.  Adherence to federal guidelines for reporting of sex and race/ethnicity in clinical trials.

Authors:  Stacie E Geller; Marci Goldstein Adams; Molly Carnes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Gender differences in salary in a recent cohort of early-career physician-researchers.

Authors:  Reshma Jagsi; Kent A Griffith; Abigail Stewart; Dana Sambuco; Rochelle DeCastro; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 7.  Representation of women in randomized clinical trials of cardiovascular disease prevention.

Authors:  Chiara Melloni; Jeffrey S Berger; Tracy Y Wang; Funda Gunes; Amanda Stebbins; Karen S Pieper; Rowena J Dolor; Pamela S Douglas; Daniel B Mark; L Kristin Newby
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2010-02-16

8.  Leadership trends in academic pediatric departments.

Authors:  F Bruder Stapleton; Douglas Jones; Debra H Fiser
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 9.  Why is John More Likely to Become Department Chair Than Jennifer?

Authors:  Molly Carnes; Christie M Bartels; Anna Kaatz; Christine Kolehmainen
Journal:  Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc       Date:  2015

Review 10.  Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Authors:  Alice H Eagly; Steven J Karau
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  4 in total

1.  Demographics, measures of professional achievement, and gender differences for diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons in 2015.

Authors:  Samantha L Morello; Sara A Colopy; Krista Bruckner; Kevin A Buhr
Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 1.936

2.  A Summary Report from the Research Partnership on Women in Science Careers.

Authors:  Phyllis L Carr; Deborah Helitzer; Karen Freund; Alyssa Westring; Richard McGee; Patricia B Campbell; Christine V Wood; Amparo Villablanca
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-07-12       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Gender Can Influence Student Experiences in MD-PhD Training.

Authors:  Anna S Heffron; Katarina M Braun; Cora Allen-Savietta; Amarette Filut; Chelsea Hanewall; Anna Huttenlocher; Jo Handelsman; Molly Carnes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Research Conducted in Women Was Deemed More Impactful but Less Publishable than the Same Research Conducted in Men.

Authors:  Sohad Murrar; Paula A Johnson; You-Geon Lee; Molly Carnes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 3.017

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.