Gender Inequalities in the Dental Workforce: Global Perspectives

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The aim of this review is to investigate the growth of diversity and inclusion in global academic dental research with a focus on gender equality. A diverse range of research methodologies were used to conduct this review, including an extensive review of the literature, engagement of key informants in dental academic leadership positions around the world, and review of current data from a variety of national and international organizations. Results provide evidence of gender inequalities that currently persist in dental academics and research. Although the gender gap among graduating dental students in North America and the two most populous countries in Europe (the United Kingdom and France) has been narrowed, women make up 30% to 40% of registered dentists in countries throughout Europe, Oceania, Asia, and Africa. In academic dentistry around the globe, greater gender inequality was found to correlate with higher ranking academic and leadership positions in the United States, United Kingdom, several countries in European Union, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. Further disparities are noted in the dental research sector, where women make up 33% of dental researchers in the European Union, 35% in North America, 55% in Brazil, and 25% in Japan. Family and societal pressures, limited access to research funding, and lack of mentoring and leadership training opportunities are reported as also contributing to gender inequalities. To continue advancing gender equality in dental academia and research, efforts should be geared toward the collection and public dissemination of data on gender-specific distributions. Such evidence-driven information will guide the selection of future strategies and best practices for promoting gender equity in the dental workforce, which provides a major pipeline of researchers and scholars for the dental profession.

Related collections

Most cited references 22

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science

S Ceci, W M Williams (2011)

Explanations for women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields of science often focus on sex discrimination in grant and manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring. Claims that women scientists suffer discrimination in these arenas rest on a set of studies undergirding policies and programs aimed at remediation. More recent and robust empiricism, however, fails to support assertions of discrimination in these domains. To better understand women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields and its causes, we reprise claims of discrimination and their evidentiary bases. Based on a review of the past 20 y of data, we suggest that some of these claims are no longer valid and, if uncritically accepted as current causes of women's lack of progress, can delay or prevent understanding of contemporary determinants of women's underrepresentation. We conclude that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed. Thus, the ongoing focus on sex discrimination in reviewing, interviewing, and hiring represents costly, misplaced effort: Society is engaged in the present in solving problems of the past, rather than in addressing meaningful limitations deterring women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers today. Addressing today's causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes. Finally, we suggest potential avenues of intervention to increase gender fairness that accord with current, as opposed to historical, findings.

0 comments Cited 317 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Why do women choose or reject careers in academic medicine? A narrative review of empirical evidence.

Laurel D. Edmunds, Pavel Ovseiko, Sasha Shepperd … (2016)

Women are under-represented in academic medicine. We reviewed the empirical evidence focusing on the reasons for women's choice or rejection of careers in academic medicine. Using a systematic search, we identified 52 studies published between 1985, and 2015. More than half had methodological limitations and most were from North America. Eight main themes were explored in these studies. There was consistent evidence for four of these themes: women are interested in teaching more than in research; participation in research can encourage women into academic medicine; women lack adequate mentors and role models; and women experience gender discrimination and bias. The evidence was conflicting on four themes: women are less interested in research than men; women lose commitment to research as their education and training progress; women are deterred from academic careers by financial considerations; and women are deterred by concerns about work-life balance. Inconsistency of findings across studies suggests significant opportunities to overcome barriers by providing a more enabling environment. We identified substantial gaps in the scientific literature that could form the focus of future research, including shifting the focus from individuals' career choices to the societal and organisational contexts and cultures within which those choices are made; extending the evidence base to include a wider range of countries and settings; and testing the efficacy of interventions.