Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42271395›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2026

Unveiling disparities: exploring the gender gap in digital literacy among faculty in a higher educational medical institute (DIGI-GAP), a mixed-methods study.

Akanksha Pal Singh, Ravneet Kaur, Rashmi Ramachandran, Margaret Bearman, Abhishek Nagarajappa, Simran Kaur, Ambuj Roy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Akanksha Pal Singh *Department of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3558-7759
Ravneet Kaur *Centre for Community Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8226-8614
Rashmi RamachandranDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine, and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. rashmiramachandran1@aiims.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6083-7513
Margaret BearmanCentre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning (CRADLE), Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6862-9871
Abhishek NagarajappaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine, and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6675-951X
Simran KaurDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9091-9480
Ambuj RoyDepartment of Cardiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6418-4388

Funding

Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF24SA0103952
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital literacy is increasingly integral to medical education, yet gender disparities may affect faculty engagement. This exploratory study examined gender-based differences in digital literacy among non-clinical faculty at a premier Indian medical institution, aiming to identify disparities and inform targeted interventions.

methodsA mixed-methods exploratory design was employed, integrating a structured online survey and in-depth semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire, developed specifically for this study after reviewing existing instruments, measured self-reported digital skills, usage frequency, and confidence levels. The survey was distributed to 64 purposively sampled non-clinical faculty. The interviews (conducted among eight faculty members) explored contextual barriers and enablers. Data were collected between March 2024 and January 2025. Chi-square (or Fisher's exact test where applicable) tests assessed gender-based differences (significance: p < 0.05).

resultsOf twenty-six faculty who responded to the survey (response rate 40.6%), 53.8% were women and 46.2% men. Over 85% reported more than 11 years of experience with computers, smartphones, and the internet; men reported longer cumulative usage. Most described moderate overall digital literacy. All participants (100%) were confident in basic digital skills; however, women reported significantly lower confidence in advanced tasks, and 31% felt behind peers in digital competencies (p = 0.02). Most faculty wished to acquire further digital skills. Qualitative findings revealed that societal expectations, time constraints, and gendered task-delegation patterns may disproportionately limit women's engagement in our setting. Men were more frequently assigned digital responsibilities. Younger faculty showed higher engagement irrespective of gender. Despite equitable institutional access to tools and training, disparities in participation and confidence persisted.

conclusionsThe gender gap in digital literacy appears to be driven primarily by differences in confidence, perception, and socio-cultural expectations rather than access inequalities in our context. The preliminary findings suggest that gender-responsive training, mentorship, revised task-delegation practices, and institutional policy reforms may help promote equitable faculty participation in the digital academic environment. Since this is a single-site exploratory study, larger studies with more sample size and multiple contexts are needed to confirm and generalize these findings.

trial registrationRegistered with the Clinical Trials Registry - India. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2024/11/076904 (Ref. No. REF/2024/11/094394) [Registered on: 18/11/2024].

Indexed as

Computer LiteracyFaculty, MedicalSexismAcademiaAdultFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedSex FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesDigital literacyDigital technologyEducational researchGender gapMedical education

Identifiers

PMID42271395
PMCPMC13422119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.