ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the representation of women and persons of colour (POC) authors of COVID-19 manuscripts submitted to, accepted in, and rejected from the Journal and to evaluate trends in their representation during the pandemic. METHODS: All COVID-19 manuscripts submitted to the Journal between 1 February 2020 and 30 April 2021 were included. Manuscript data were retrieved from Editorial Manager, and gender and POC status were obtained through: 1) e-mail communication with corresponding authors; 2) e-mail queries to other coauthors; 3) NamSor software, and 4) Internet searches. The data were described using percentages and summary statistics. A two-sample test of proportions was used for comparisons and trends were analyzed with linear regression. RESULTS: We identified 314 manuscripts (1,555 authors), 95 (461 authors) of which were accepted for publication. Of all authors, 515 (33%) were women, and women were the lead and senior authors of 101 (32%) and 69 (23%) manuscripts, respectively. There were no differences in women's representation as authors between accepted and rejected manuscripts. Overall, 923/1,555 (59%) authors were identified as POC, with a significantly lower proportion of POC authors among accepted vs rejected manuscripts (41%, 188/461 vs 67%, 735/1,094; difference, -26%; 95% CI, -32 to -21; P < 0.001). We did not observe significant trends in the proportion of women and POC authors over the study period. CONCLUSION: The proportion of women authors of COVID-19 manuscripts was lower than men's representation. Further research is required to determine the factors that account for the higher proportion of POC authors across rejected manuscripts.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avions pour objectif d'évaluer la représentation des femmes et des personnes de couleur ayant rédigé des manuscrits portant sur la COVID-19 soumis, acceptés et rejetés au Journal et d'évaluer les tendances concernant leur représentation pendant la pandémie. MéTHODE: Tous les manuscrits portant sur la COVID-19 soumis au Journal entre le 1er février 2020 et le 30 avril 2021 ont été inclus. Les données des manuscrits ont été extraites de la plateforme de gestion des manuscrits Editorial Manager, et le sexe et le statut de personne de couleur ont été obtenus par : 1) la communication par courrier électronique avec les auteurs et autrices correspondant·es; 2) des requêtes par courrier électronique envoyées à d'autres coautrices et coauteurs; 3) le logiciel NamSor, et 4) des recherches sur Internet. Les données ont été décrites à l'aide de pourcentages et de statistiques sommaires. Un test de proportions à deux échantillons a été utilisé pour les comparaisons et les tendances ont été analysées par régression linéaire. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié 314 manuscrits (1555 auteurs et autrices), dont 95 (461 autrices et auteurs) ont été acceptés pour publication. Parmi tou·tes les auteurs/autrices, 515 (33 %) étaient des femmes, et les femmes étaient les autrices principales et senior de 101 (32 %) et 69 (23 %) manuscrits, respectivement. Il n'y avait aucune différence dans la représentation des femmes en tant qu'autrices entre les manuscrits acceptés et rejetés. Dans l'ensemble, 923/1555 (59 %) auteurs et autrices ont été identifié·es comme étant des personnes de couleur, avec une proportion significativement plus faible d'autrices et d'auteurs de couleur parmi les manuscrits acceptés vs rejetés (41 %, 188/461 vs 67 %, 735/1094; différence, -26 %; IC 95 %, -32 à -21; P < 0,001). Nous n'avons pas observé de tendances significatives dans la proportion d'auteurs et d'autrices femmes et de couleur au cours de la période à l'étude. CONCLUSION: La proportion de femmes autrices de manuscrits sur la COVID-19 était inférieure à celle des hommes. D'autres recherches sont nécessaires pour déterminer les facteurs qui expliquent la plus grande proportion d'autrices et d'auteurs de couleur parmi les manuscrits rejetés.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia , COVID-19 , Male , Humans , Female , Retrospective Studies , Color , Canada/epidemiology , AuthorshipABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study explores the relationship between emotional support, perceived risk and mental health outcomes among health care workers, who face high rates of burnout and mental distress since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multicentred online survey of health care workers in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic evaluated coping strategies, confidence in infection control, impact of previous work during the 2003 SARS outbreak and emotional support. Mental health outcomes were assessed using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the Impact of Event Scale - Revised and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Of 3852 participants, 8.2% sought professional mental health services while 77.3% received emotional support from family, 74.0% from friends and 70.3% from colleagues. Those who felt unsupported in their work had higher odds ratios of experiencing moderate and severe symptoms of anxiety (odds ratio [OR] = 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.84-2.69), PTSD (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.58-2.25) and depression (OR = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.57-2.25). Nearly 40% were afraid of telling family about the risks they were exposed to at work. Those who were able to share this information demonstrated lower risk of anxiety (OR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.48-0.69), PTSD (OR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.41-0.56) and depression (OR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.47-0.65). CONCLUSION: Informal sources of support, including family, friends and colleagues, play an important role in mitigating distress and should be encouraged and utilized more by health care workers.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychological Distress , Anxiety/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals often identify with a gender different to the one assigned at birth. Transition is a term used to describe the process TGD individuals take to live as their true gender. Surgery can be a very important aspect of care for members of TGD communities. Transition-related surgery (TRS) refers to many different types of surgeries completed to meet a TGD individual's gender-related goals. While various systematic reviews have attempted to synthesise the existing peer-reviewed literature around aspects of TRS, there are few scoping reviews in this area. Our scoping review aims to address this gap through providing an up-to-date overview of the TRS literature in order to provide an overarching view of the topic. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: This review will follow the methods outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews and will be reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. A search of nine scientific databases resulted in 20 062 potential articles. After removing duplicates, articles will be screened for inclusion using Covidence. Data extraction and synthesis will be carried out using NVivo and reviewed by team members. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this study is a scoping review of the existing literature, no ethics review is required. The findings from this review will be disseminated through multiple pathways including open access publication, submission to conferences, social media and Listservs. The findings of the study will also be readily available to clinicians, organizations, interest groups, and policy-makers.
Subject(s)
Gender Identity , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Review Literature as Topic , Systematic Reviews as TopicABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Explore how previous work during the 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak affects the psychological response of clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers (HCWs) to the current COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-centered hospital online survey of HCWs in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada. Mental health outcomes of HCWs who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic and the SARS outbreak were assessed using Impact of Events-Revised scale (IES-R), Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Among 3852 participants, moderate/severe scores for symptoms of post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (50.2%), anxiety (24.6%), and depression (31.5%) were observed among HCWs. Work during the 2003 SARS outbreak was reported by 1116 respondents (29.1%), who had lower scores for symptoms of PTSD (P = .002), anxiety (P < .001), and depression (P < .001) compared to those who had not worked during the SARS outbreak. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed non-clinical HCWs during this pandemic were at higher risk of anxiety (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.19-2.15, P = .01) and depressive symptoms (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.34-3.07, P < .001). HCWs using sedatives (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.61-4.03, P < .001), those who cared for only 2-5 patients with COVID-19 (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.06-2.38, P = .01), and those who had been in isolation for COVID-19 (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.96-1.93, P = .05), were at higher risk of moderate/severe symptoms of PTSD. In addition, deterioration in sleep was associated with symptoms of PTSD (OR, 4.68, 95% CI, 3.74-6.30, P < .001), anxiety (OR, 3.09, 95% CI, 2.11-4.53, P < .001), and depression (OR 5.07, 95% CI, 3.48-7.39, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Psychological distress was observed in both clinical and non-clinical HCWs, with no impact from previous SARS work experience. As the pandemic continues, increasing psychological and team support may decrease the mental health impacts.