MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387439375 · doi:10.1002/jdd.13389

Gender trends in dentistry: Dental faculty and academic leadership

2023· article· en· W4387439375 on OpenAlexaff
A-Ram Kim, Nour Karra, Crystal Song, Pamela J. Linder, Francesca Bonino, P. Doig, Andréa Ferreira Zandoná

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceDescriptive statisticsRank (graph theory)MedicineHigher educationDemographyUnderrepresented MinorityDental educationFamily medicineLaggingPsychologyMedical educationPolitical scienceSociologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Gender equality in the healthcare workforce has been a topic of discourse for many decades. In dental academia, women's representation of enrolled students and faculty has risen consistently since the 1980s. However, women in faculty leadership positions may still be lagging when compared to men. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the number of women who occupy the upper echelons of academic rank and title by analyzing cross-referenced data from the American Dental Association and the American Dental Education Association on women dental school graduates in relation to academic appointments. METHODS: Gender distribution in rank, title, and appointments in the decade from 2011 to 2019, as well as percentage of women graduates over the same period, were collected for descriptive statistics. Multiple linear regression analysis, Cochran Armitage, and chi-square tests were conducted to examine trends over the years and to determine significant differences in overall percentages (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The total women faculty percentages ranged from 36% to 40%. While the lower-level rank of instructor retained a higher representation of women (56%-65%), the higher rank of professor had disproportionately lower women percentages (18%-26%). Graduates, full-time faculty, lower-level academic ranks, and higher-level academic ranks for women followed similar upward trends that were statistically significant (p < 0.05). When comparing the different groups against each other, the annual increase in women DMD/DDS graduate percentage was higher than women full-time faculty (0.28%), instructor rank (0.92%), professor rank (0.50%), and department chair appointments (0.49%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that women are still underrepresented at higher academic ranks. However, the upward trends for professors, assistant deans, and program chairs suggest that in recent years, more women faculty may have been encouraged, mentored, or offered higher administrative positions in academic institutions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.219
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainIncentives
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental EducationSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207