Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39069605›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2024

A rapid realist review on leadership and career advancement interventions for women in healthcare.

Doreen Mucheru, Eilish McAuliffe, Anosisye Kesale, Brynne Gilmore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Doreen MucheruUCD School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. doreen.mucheru@ucd.ie.
Eilish McAuliffeUCD School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Anosisye KesaleMzumbe University, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Brynne GilmoreUCD School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

Irish Research Council COALESCE/2022/1714
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Women represent 70% of the global health workforce but only occupy 25% of health and social care leadership positions. Gender-based stereotypes, discrimination, family responsibilities, and self-perceived deficiencies in efficacy and confidence inhibit the seniority and leadership of women. The leadership inequality is often compounded by the intersection of race and socio-economic identities. Resolving gender inequalities in healthcare leadership brings women's expertise to healthcare decision making, which can lead to equity of healthcare access and improve healthcare services. With the aim of enhancing women's advancement to leadership positions, a rapid realist review (RRR) was conducted to identify the leadership and career advancement interventions that work for women in healthcare, why these interventions are effective, for whom they are effective, and within which contexts these interventions work. A RRR ultimately articulates this knowledge through a theory describing an intervention's generative causation. The Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) for conducting a realist synthesis guided the methodology. Preliminary theories on leadership and career advancement interventions for women in healthcare were constructed based on an appraisal of key reviews and consultation with an expert panel, which guided the systematic searching and initial theory refinement. Following the literature search, 22 studies met inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. The review process and consultation with the expert panel yielded nine final programme theories. Theories on programmes which enhanced leadership outcomes among women in health services or professional associations centred on organisational and management involvement; mentorship of women; delivering leadership education; and development of key leadership skills. The success of these strategies was facilitated by accommodating programme environments, adequacy and relevance of support provided and programme accessibility. The relationship between underlying intervention entities, stakeholder responses, contexts and leadership outcomes, provides a basis for underpinning the design for leadership and career advancement interventions for women in healthcare.

Indexed as

Career MobilityLeadershipFemaleHumansSexismCareer advancementGender equityHealthcareInterventionsLeadershipProgrammesWomen

Identifiers

PMID39069605
PMCPMC11285393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.