A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment
- PMID: 27432056
- PMCID: PMC4950803
- DOI: 10.1186/s12961-016-0126-z
A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment
Abstract
Global investment in biomedical research has grown significantly over the last decades, reaching approximately a quarter of a trillion US dollars in 2010. However, not all of this investment is distributed evenly by gender. It follows, arguably, that scarce research resources may not be optimally invested (by either not supporting the best science or by failing to investigate topics that benefit women and men equitably). Women across the world tend to be significantly underrepresented in research both as researchers and research participants, receive less research funding, and appear less frequently than men as authors on research publications. There is also some evidence that women are relatively disadvantaged as the beneficiaries of research, in terms of its health, societal and economic impacts. Historical gender biases may have created a path dependency that means that the research system and the impacts of research are biased towards male researchers and male beneficiaries, making it inherently difficult (though not impossible) to eliminate gender bias. In this commentary, we - a group of scholars and practitioners from Africa, America, Asia and Europe - argue that gender-sensitive research impact assessment could become a force for good in moving science policy and practice towards gender equity. Research impact assessment is the multidisciplinary field of scientific inquiry that examines the research process to maximise scientific, societal and economic returns on investment in research. It encompasses many theoretical and methodological approaches that can be used to investigate gender bias and recommend actions for change to maximise research impact. We offer a set of recommendations to research funders, research institutions and research evaluators who conduct impact assessment on how to include and strengthen analysis of gender equity in research impact assessment and issue a global call for action.
Keywords: Athena SWAN; Call for action; Gender; Health research; Path dependency; Research impact assessment; Science policy.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science: an exploratory study of women's and men's perceptions.Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Feb 21;15(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0177-9. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017. PMID: 28222735 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding the Athena SWAN award scheme for gender equality as a complex social intervention in a complex system: analysis of Silver award action plans in a comparative European perspective.Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 14;18(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-0527-x. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020. PMID: 32059678 Free PMC article.
-
Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes.BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 8;6(9):e012090. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012090. BMJ Open. 2016. PMID: 27609850 Free PMC article.
-
Gender, women and scientific research.Medwave. 2020 Mar 31;20(2):e7857. doi: 10.5867/medwave.2020.02.7857. Medwave. 2020. PMID: 32243428 Review. English, Spanish.
-
Organisational best practices towards gender equality in science and medicine.Lancet. 2019 Feb 9;393(10171):587-593. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33188-X. Lancet. 2019. PMID: 30739694 Review.
Cited by
-
Improving the mental health of working women with work-life conflict: A protocol development for an explanatory mixed method study.J Educ Health Promot. 2023 Nov 27;12:416. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_223_23. eCollection 2023. J Educ Health Promot. 2023. PMID: 38333156 Free PMC article.
-
Gender inequities in medical research funding is driving an exodus of women from Australian STEMM academia.Immunol Cell Biol. 2022 Oct;100(9):674-678. doi: 10.1111/imcb.12568. Epub 2022 Jul 5. Immunol Cell Biol. 2022. PMID: 35748687 Free PMC article.
-
Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 15;19(1):169. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4001-9. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019. PMID: 30876452 Free PMC article.
-
Institutional-level drivers of gender-inequitable scientific career progression in sub-Saharan Africa.Health Res Policy Syst. 2021 Aug 17;19(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s12961-021-00767-1. Health Res Policy Syst. 2021. PMID: 34404432 Free PMC article.
-
Incorporating sex, gender and vulnerable populations in a large multisite health research programme: The Ontario Pharmacy Evidence Network as a case study.Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Mar 20;15(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0182-z. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017. PMID: 28320403 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Edmunds LD, Ovseiko PV, Shepperd S, Greenhalgh T, Frith P, Roberts NW, et al. Why do women choose or reject careers in academic medicine? A narrative review of empirical evidence. Lancet. 2016;pii: S0140-6736(15)01091-0. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01091-0. Ahead of print. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous