By Nicole C. Woitowich, PhD

Academic conferences and symposia provide scientists with the opportunity to learn about the most cutting edge research, establish professional networks and collaboration, and foster the exchange of ideas among colleagues. But for those invited to speak at a conference, it can provide the additional benefit of increased visibility and professional recognition within one’s field. However, for female scientists their invitation to present might have gotten “lost in the mail.”

A new study published in the journal, PloS One, analyzed the ratio of female to male speakers at conferences held by two scientific societies between the years 1999 and 2015 [1]. The authors found that neither the number of female presenters nor female symposia organizers increased significantly over time.

Lead author of the study, Stephanie Sardelis found this to be alarming, “We expected there to be more opportunity for women to excel…especially since both societies have been improving their gender policies,” she says.

Unfortunately, these results are not surprising. Several other studies have shown that women are underrepresented at academic symposia [2,3], and when women are given the chance to present, they speak for less time compared to their male peers [4]. In an attempt to mitigate gender bias at academic conferences the solution seems all too simple: Invite more women! Specifically, invite more women to be symposia organizers.  Sardelis and her colleague, Dr. Joshua Drew, found that when the number of female symposia organizers increased, so did the number of female presenters.  This suggests that women may be more attuned to gender bias and in turn, encourage the promotion of their female colleagues at conferences or symposia.

In addition to increasing the number of female conference organizers, Sardelis and her colleague suggest that scientific societies provide adequate travel funds, child-friendly facilities, and enforce a strict Code of Conduct that includes zero-tolerance for abuse towards women, minorities, and differently abled attendees.

Sardelis believes that gender bias at conferences is indicative of a more systemic problem harbored by academia as a culture. “To reduce the gender gap, all scientists must eliminate the misconception that women are less competent than their male colleagues,” she shares.

Yet, Sardelis remains confident that steps are being taken in the right direction after attending a recent conference citing numerous female speakers, gender neutral bathrooms and nursing rooms, along with a focus group dedicated to women at scientific conferences. “[This] was a testament to the fact that gender disparity is a serious issue, but one that is being (albeit slowly) targeted by the scientific community,” she says.

Let’s hope the scientific community can pick up the pace.  

Sources:

1. Sardelis and Drew, PLoS One. 2016; 11(7):e0160015.
2. Casadevall and Handelsman, mBio. 2014; 5(1):e00846-13.
3. Schroeder et al., J Evol Biol. 2013; 26(9):2063-2069. 
4. Jones et al., PeerJ. 2014; 2:e627. 

A recent study conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) found that women in countries across the globe, report being in poorer health than men [1]. The WHO administered a survey to over 250,000 individuals in 59 countries, which asked participants to answer questions regarding chronic health conditions, the ability to partake in daily activities, and overall wellbeing. Across all geographical regions and age demographics, women were more likely to report being in “poor health” and exhibit greater limitations in their daily activities.

Does this mean that women worldwide face health inequities due to their gender or their biological makeup? The study authors suggest it may be a combination of both. First, biological factors dependent on sex may play a role in disease incidence, prevalence, symptoms, age at onset, and severity. Yet, sociological factors such as discriminatory values and behaviors towards women coupled with biases from healthcare systems may factor into poor health outcomes.

The WHO is currently conducting additional research necessary to determine if the self-reported “poor health” matches to actual clinical and biological data through the study on Global Ageing and Adult Health [2]. This will provide a clearer view on where women’s health issues stand across globe.

 Sources:

Routine breast and cervical cancer screenings aid in the early detection and diagnosis of cancer. However, for women who face socioeconomic hardships and are under- or uninsured, preventative cancer screening may be a luxury which they cannot afford. A recent study published in the journal, JAMA Internal Medicine, suggests that patient navigators play a critical role in helping women access gynecological cancer screening.

Patient navigators are individuals who work alongside patients and assist them in making appropriate healthcare choices, provide information and education relevant to their needs, and advocate on their behalf [2]. Oftentimes, patients may need access to health information in their native language, assistance in arranging transportation to-and-from appointments, or simply someone to accompany them to their visit. In this study, patients who were overdue for routine breast, cancer, and colon cancer screening were randomized into two groups: One group of patients was provided access to a patient navigator, the other group received typical notifications of overdue screening by phone or electronic reminders. The study authors found that patients who had access to a patient navigator were more likely to complete their cancer screening than those who did not.   

Kristin Smith, a patient navigator within the Northwestern Medical Group, is not surprised by these results. She states, “Having one person to help break down the complexities of healthcare can make or break the experience that a patient has in a hospital or physician’s office.”

 “By enabling a patient through a navigator, hospital systems can more readily serve immediate patient needs,” shares Smith. Thus, integration of patient navigators within interdisciplinary healthcare teams may lead to improved quality of care for all.  

Sources:

1. Percac-Lima et al., JAMA Intern Med. 2016. 1;176(7):930-7.
2. American Medical Association

by Nicole C. Woitowich, PhD

I am what you might stereotype as a “girly girl.” I love everything that comes in pink, I have seen the movie Legally Blonde more times than I would like to admit, and whatever Taylor Swift song is popular at the moment is probably my “jam.”

 I am also a biochemist.

 Are these things mutually exclusive? Do women need to hide their love for bold colors, high heels, and pop culture in order to be taken seriously as a scientist? Apparently so, according to many blogs and articles written by other female scientists. Their advice ranges from keeping makeup natural, to wearing dark colors to look more authoritative, or adding “soft touches” such as scarves if you must feel “feminine.”

 The worst part is, their advice isn’t entirely wrong. A recent study by Dr. Sarah Banchefsky and colleagues at the University of Colorado Boulder asked participants to rank photos, unbeknownst to them of real scientists, on their gendered appearance (masculine or feminine) and career likelihood (scientist or early childhood educator). They found that the more feminine a woman appeared, the less likely she was deemed to be a scientist.

 Together with the current climate in the scientific workforce where women are under-represented in leadership roles and tenured faculty, I almost understand why women would want to “tone it down,” and adopt the dress and social behaviors of their male peers.

 Banchefsky, lead author of the study, provides some insight, “We all, to a certain degree, adapt and conform to fit into the environment around us and avoid having people ask questions or look at us askance. I think women do this to be taken seriously, to avoid being asked, ‘Are you really a scientist?’”

 Furthermore, she adds, “…men serve as the power holders and gate-keepers in [STEM] fields, so women work hard to and want to be a part of their circle. Unfortunately, women’s assimilation reinforces the masculine culture in STEM.”

 Hiding or limiting femininity may impart damaging consequences on young and aspiring scientists as well. According to Banchefsky, “If [young women] have in their mind that first, women aren’t typically in science, and when they are, they need to be gender-neutral or non-feminine -  they may worry that they won’t be able to express part of who they are [through] their gender identity in a science field.”

  “I think it’s important to highlight that it just doesn’t have to be this way,” Banchefsky states, and I completely agree.

 To this end, I will continue to match my pink goggles to my outfit and wear pink nitrile gloves because it makes me feel more like “me.” So when young women visit the laboratory they can see that a scientist can be whomever she wants to be.

 Source: Banchefsky et al., Sex Roles. 2016; Epub ahead of print.