ArticleBMJ open2016
Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A systematic review of interventions to support the careers of women in academic medicine and other disciplines.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- Strategies to Prevent or Reduce Gender Bias in Peer Review of Research Grants: A Rapid Scoping Review.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Evaluating equity interventions and the limits of institutional change: from admission to clinical leadership in UK medical education.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Being a woman researcher in dangerous laboratories: biosafety level 3 and tuberculosis.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2025Article
- Gender equality among medical and dental academic researchers in West Africa: a theoretical analysis of a compendium of research.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Article
- Dismantling the structures of inequality: why we need feminist leadership in the health sector.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Perceptions of gender equity and markers of achievement in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a qualitative study.Health research policy and systems · 2022Article
- Factors that influence the implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in healthcare leadership: A meta-ethnographic study.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Why both sides of the gender equation matter.eLife · 2022Article
- Gender Equality in Employment among Health Care Undergraduate Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Barriers of West African women scientists in their research and academic careers: A qualitative research.PloS one · 2022Observational
- What do the narratives tell us? Exploring the implementation of the Athena SWAN Ireland Charter.Frontiers in sociology · 2022Article
- Female Representation: Australian Diabetes and Endocrinology Societies.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Advancing women in healthcare leadership: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of multi-sector evidence on organisational interventions.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Gender equality in academic psychiatry in the UK in 2019.BJPsych bulletin · 2021Article
- Certifying Gender Equality in Research: Lessons Learnt From Athena SWAN and Total E-Quality Award Schemes.Frontiers in sociology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesGender inequity has persisted in academic medicine. Yet equity is vital for countries to achieve their full potential in terms of translational research and patient benefit. This study sought to understand how the gender equity programme, Athena SWAN, can be enabled and constrained by interactions between the programme and the context it is implemented into, and whether these interactions might produce unintended consequences.
designMultimethod qualitative case studies using a realist evaluation approach.
setting5 departments from a university medical school hosting a Translational Research Organisation.
participants25 hours of observations of gender equality committee meetings, 16 in-depth interviews with Heads of Departments, Committee Leads and key personnel involved in the initiative. 4 focus groups with 15 postdoctoral researchers, lecturers and senior lecturers.
resultsThe implementation of Athena SWAN principles was reported to have created social space to address gender inequity and to have highlighted problematic practices to staff. However, a number of factors reduced the programme's potential to impact gender inequity. Gender inequity was reproduced in the programme's enactment as female staff was undertaking a disproportionate amount of Athena SWAN work, with potential negative impacts on individual women's career progression. Early career researchers experienced problems accessing Athena SWAN initiatives. Furthermore, the impact of the programme was perceived to be undermined by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms, which are beyond the programme's remit.
conclusionsGender equity programmes have the potential to address inequity. However, paradoxically, they can also unintentionally reproduce and reinforce gender inequity through their enactment. Potential programme impacts may be undermined by barriers to staff availing of career development and training initiatives, and by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.