TY - JOUR
T1 - Global evidence of gender inequity in academic health research
T2 - A living scoping review protocol
AU - Tricco, Andrea C.
AU - Lachance, Chantelle C.
AU - Rios, Patricia
AU - Darvesh, Nazia
AU - Antony, Jesmin
AU - Radhakrishnan, Amruta
AU - Anand, Sonia S.
AU - Baxter, Nancy
AU - Burns, Karen E.A.
AU - Coyle, Doug
AU - Curran, Janet A.
AU - Fiest, Kirsten
AU - Graham, Ian D.
AU - Hawker, Gillian
AU - Legare, France
AU - Watt, Jennifer
AU - Witteman, Holly O.
AU - Clark, Jocalyn P.
AU - Bourgeault, Ivy Lynn
AU - Leigh, Jeanna Parsons
AU - Ahmed, Sofia B.
AU - Lawford, Karen
AU - Aiken, Alice
AU - Falk-Krzesinski, Holly J.
AU - Langlois, Etienne V.
AU - McCabe, Chris
AU - Shepperd, Sasha
AU - Skidmore, Becky
AU - Pattani, Reena
AU - Leon, Natalie
AU - Lundine, Jamie
AU - Adisso, Lionel
AU - El-Adhami, Wafa
AU - Straus, Sharon E.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 JBI.
PY - 2020/10
Y1 - 2020/10
N2 - Objective: The objective of this review is to describe the global evidence of gender inequity among individuals with appointments at academic institutions that conduct health research, and examine how gender intersects with other social identities to influence outcomes. Introduction: The gender demographics of universities have shifted, yet the characteristics of those who lead academic health research institutions have not reflected this change. Synthesized evidence will guide decisionmaking and policy development to support the progress of gender and other under-represented social identities in academia. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider any quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods primary research that reports outcome data related to gender equity and other social identities among individuals affiliated with academic or research institutions that conduct health research, originating from any country. Methods: The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Cochrane Collaboration’s guidance on living reviews will inform the review methods. Information sources will include electronic databases, unpublished literature sources, reference scanning of relevant systematic reviews, and sources provided by experts on the research team. Searches will be run regularly to monitor the development of new literature and determine when the review will be updated. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers working independently, and all discrepancies will be resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Data synthesis will summarize information using descriptive frequencies and simple thematic analysis. Results will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension to scoping reviews. Registration: Open Science Framework: Https://osf.io/8wk7e/.
AB - Objective: The objective of this review is to describe the global evidence of gender inequity among individuals with appointments at academic institutions that conduct health research, and examine how gender intersects with other social identities to influence outcomes. Introduction: The gender demographics of universities have shifted, yet the characteristics of those who lead academic health research institutions have not reflected this change. Synthesized evidence will guide decisionmaking and policy development to support the progress of gender and other under-represented social identities in academia. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider any quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods primary research that reports outcome data related to gender equity and other social identities among individuals affiliated with academic or research institutions that conduct health research, originating from any country. Methods: The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Cochrane Collaboration’s guidance on living reviews will inform the review methods. Information sources will include electronic databases, unpublished literature sources, reference scanning of relevant systematic reviews, and sources provided by experts on the research team. Searches will be run regularly to monitor the development of new literature and determine when the review will be updated. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers working independently, and all discrepancies will be resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Data synthesis will summarize information using descriptive frequencies and simple thematic analysis. Results will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension to scoping reviews. Registration: Open Science Framework: Https://osf.io/8wk7e/.
KW - Diversity
KW - Gender equity
KW - Knowledge synthesis
KW - Living review
KW - Scoping review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092803586&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.11124/JBIES-20-00078
DO - 10.11124/JBIES-20-00078
M3 - Artículo
C2 - 32925395
AN - SCOPUS:85092803586
SN - 2689-8381
VL - 18
SP - 2181
EP - 2193
JO - JBI Evidence Synthesis
JF - JBI Evidence Synthesis
IS - 10
ER -