Feminism is for everybody

Understanding gender-based violence perpetration to create a safer future for women and girls.

Norway's Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg: leader on MDG4

Reporting sex and gender in medical research

How should medical science change?

Editor’s note: The opinions expressed in this editorial do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the AAMC or its members. This issue of Academic Medicine is devoted to an exciting set of research reports, reviews, and commentaries selected for publication from more than 60 submissions as part of our ongoing collaboration with the Research In Medical Education (RIME) program.1–17 The topics are wide-ranging—experiences of moral distress among trainees, interprofessional team leadership, assessment and feedback during training, and the role of arts and humanities in professional identity formation, to name just a few. As in the past, each of these published articles will be presented and discussed as part of the RIME program at Learn Serve Lead 2024: The AAMC Annual Meeting, which takes place this month. RIME’s work highlights creativity and quality in education scholarship and communicates the importance of medical education inquiry to stakeholders throughout academic medicine, such as institutional leaders, promotions committee members, and learners. RIME articles elevate issues of concern to medical education in a timely manner. Such attention can lead to dialogue, consensus, and advances in the field. RIME also supports the professional development of medical education scholars. Manuscripts submitted for consideration by the RIME Program Planning Committee receive written feedback from reviewers and committee members, and service on the RIME committee itself is a valuable learning experience and opportunity for leadership in medical education and academic medicine. In celebrating RIME’s 60th anniversary in 2021, members of the RIME Program Planning Committee conducted a survey of past RIME chairs to better understand how RIME has helped advance medical education research.18 The past chairs recognized RIME as a catalyst for medical education research, strengthening the rigor and impact of medical education research, developing a community of scholars, and supporting academic career development. They also identified as priorities the need for greater innovation and translation of medical education research to practice. They welcomed new activities and collaborations, such as faculty mentorship initiatives and support for educators pursuing advanced degrees in education.18 Each year leaders on the RIME committee prepare a commentary, published as part of the RIME collection, that addresses a way to improve medical education research in academic medicine. In 2012, RIME leaders called for a more intentional, strategic, and inclusive effort. Medical education research requires an intellectual structure, a framework into which seemingly random studies can come together to improve learning and practice. The challenge before us is to look forward and develop a well-laid plan to further the field of medical education research nationally and internationally.19 For this year’s commentary, Sukhera and colleagues1 similarly challenge the field of academic medicine to do work that will improve learning and practice. They encourage medical education researchers to think beyond rigor, relevance, and utility in their work and to find ways to generate new knowledge that is readily—and will actually be—used. Drawing upon insights from implementation science, the authors call upon medical education researchers to mobilize toward actionable, scalable, impactful scholarship. Over the years, Academic Medicine has partnered with RIME to publish 30 journal supplements; RIME collections have also appeared in our regular issues in October 2012, October 2013, and November 2014. The editorial teams of Academic Medicine and our AAMC sister journal, MedEdPORTAL, have also been fortunate to benefit from the service of members of the RIME community, such as manuscript authors, creators of curricular and education resources, and expert reviewers. Authors of RIME articles have been featured on the Academic Medicine Podcast, which further increases the reach of the scholarly contributions. Academic Medicine also was pleased to collaborate with the leadership of RIME in 2022 when it launched its mentorship program for early and underrepresented faculty scholars, a program that has evolved to become MedEdSCHOLAR.20 This year, we are pleased to feature the RIME articles and commentaries in this issue of Academic Medicine. This decision reflects our continued strong support for the work of the RIME planning committee, RIME authors, and the broader RIME community in furthering medical education scholarship.

A pandemic treaty for a fragmented global polity

Species differences in captivity: where are the invertebrates?

The purpose of this manuscript is to provide an overview of the significant role that women play in providing global health care, barriers encountered to achieving gender equality in global health leadership, and to propose key recommendations for advancing gender equality in global health decision-making through the integration of gender mainstreaming, gender-based analysis, and gender transformative leadership (GTL) approaches. Data were evaluated to determine the participation rate of women in global health care and social sector roles in comparison to men. Gender equality data from the United Nations, World Health Organization, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, International Labour Organization, and other resources were analyzed to assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on gender equality with an emphasis on women in global health leadership positions, the health care and social sector, and gender equality measures for girls and women throughout the world. The literature was examined to identify persistent barriers to gender equality in global health leadership positions. Additionally, a review of the literature was conducted to identify key strategies and recommendations for achieving gender equality in global health decision-making; integrating gender mainstreaming; conducting gender-based analysis; and adopting GTL programs, incentives, and policies to advance gender equality in global health organizations. Women represent 70% of the health and social care sector global workforce but only 25% of senior global health leadership roles. Since 2018, there has been a lack of meaningful change in the gender equality policy arenas at global health organizations that has led to significant increases in women serving in global leadership decision-making senior positions. During the pandemic in 2020, there were nearly 100 open vacancies-one-quarter of CEO and board chair positions-at global health organizations, but none were filled by women. Women disproportionately provide caregiving and unpaid care work, and the pandemic has increased this burden with women spending 15 hoursa week more on domestic labor than men. A lack of uniform, state-sponsored paid parental leave and support for childcare, eldercare, and caregiving, which is overwhelmingly assumed by women, serve as major barriers to gender parity in global health leadership and the career advancement of women. The pandemic has adversely impacted women in global health care and social sector roles. During the pandemic, there has been a widening of the gender pay gap, a lack of gains for women in global health leadership positions, an increase in caregiving responsibilities for women, and more women and girls have been pushed back into extreme poverty than men and boys. Globally, there is still resistance to women serving in senior leadership roles, and social and cultural norms, gender stereotypes, and restrictions on women's rights are deeply intertwined with barriers that reinforce gender inequality in global health leadership. To ensure comprehensive human rights and that equitable workforce opportunities are available, the concept of gender equality must be expanded within the global health community to consistently include not only women and girls and men and boys, but also persons who identify as nonbinary and gender nonconforming. Efforts to eliminate remnants of systemic and structural gender discrimination must also incorporate gender mainstreaming, gender-based analysis, and gender transformative approaches to achieve gender equality throughout global health systems and organizations.

Gender equality is a concept that is synonymous with debates towards economic and societal advancement, as manifested through the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal 5. This study sets out to identify the key indicators driving gender equality in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education and employment in Jordan. This area is both critical and timely in light of emerging challenges facing technological advancement, progressive economies, and wider societal inclusion strategies within the professional environment. This study predominantly employs a quantitative methodology, utilising a survey to evaluate and rank a comprehensive set of indicators/challenges associated with gender equality in the published literature. Feedback is gathered from both male and female participants. The findings of this study reveal certain categories and indicators that are highly ranked compared with others, with practical aspects such as workplace conditions and professional treatment, societal norms and gender stereotypes, and professional perceptions and underlying gender bias being more predominant in Jordan. This study also revealed differing challenges facing gender equality in employment compared with the ones faced in education. This finding resonates with the historical trajectory of academic progress in STEM fields in Jordan, and its divergence emphasises the need for a nuanced exploration to advance gender equality in STEM effectively.

The need for metrics to measure progress on racial equity in global public health and medicine

As the Biochemical Society launches a new grant scheme for Gender Equality in Science this year, we look at the recent history and current thought on this long-standing and important issue.

New modelled estimates of maternal mortality

Science at WHO and UNICEF: the corrosion of trust

Oral health at a tipping point

Global Health