Physician and Biomedical Scientist Harassment on Social Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This survey study assesses the frequency and nature of harassment on social media experienced by physicians, biomedical scientists, and trainees during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Impact of Stress on Menstrual Cyclicity During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Survey Study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has introduced acute and persistent psychosocial stressors for many individuals, with emerging gender differences that suggest women may be at greater risk for poorer mental health outcomes. This may have unintended consequences for women's overall health and well-being, including disruptions to reproductive function as elevated stress is often associated with menstrual cycle irregularities. The objective of this study was to determine if and how the COVID-19 pandemic and its related stressors have impacted women's menstrual cyclicity. Materials and Methods: An online survey instrument designed to capture self-reported information on menstrual cycle changes and perceived stress levels was distributed between July and August 2020. A total of 210 women between the ages of 18-45 years met stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria and completed the survey. Results: Of the 210 respondents, more than half (54%) reported changes in their menstrual cycles. These included changes in menstrual cycle length (50%), the duration of menses (34%), and changes in premenstrual symptoms (50%). Respondents with high perceived stress scale (PSS) scores during Covid were more likely to experience a longer duration of menses (p < 0.001) and heavier bleeding during menses (p = 0.028) compared with those with moderate Covid PSS scores. Conclusions: By uncovering a trend in increased menstrual cycle irregularities during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study contributes to our understanding of the implications that the pandemic may have on women's reproductive health.

Sex and Gender Bias in Covid-19 Clinical Case Reports.

Clinical case reports circulate relevant information regarding disease presentation and describe treatment protocols, particularly for novel conditions. In the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, case reports provided key insights into the pathophysiology and sequelae associated with Covid-19 infection and described treatment mechanisms and outcomes. However, case reports are often subject to selection bias due to their singular nature. To better understand how selection biases may have influenced Covid-19-releated case reports, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of Covid-19-releated case reports published in high impact journals from January 1 to June 1, 2020. Case reports were coded for patient sex, country of institutional affiliation, physiological system, and first and last author gender. Of 494 total case reports, 45% (n = 221) of patients were male, 30% (n = 146) were female, and 25% (n = 124) included both sexes. Ratios of male-only to female-only case reports varied by physiological system. The majority of case reports had male first (61%, n = 302) and last (70%, n = 340) authors. Case reports with male last authors were more likely to describe male patients [X 2 (2, n = 465) = 6.6, p = 0.037], while case reports with female last authors were more likely to include patients of both sexes [OR = 1.918 (95% CI = 1.163-3.16)]. Despite a limited sample size, these data reflect emerging research on sex-differences in the physiological presentation and impact of Covid-19 and parallel large-scale trends in authorship patterns. Ultimately, this work highlights potential biases in the dissemination of clinical information via case reports and underscores the inextricable influences of sex and gender biases within biomedicine.

COVID-19 Threatens Progress Toward Gender Equity Within Academic Medicine.

Women remain underrepresented within academic medicine despite past and present efforts to promote gender equity. The authors discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic could stymie progress toward gender parity within the biomedical workforce and limit the retention and advancement of women in science and medicine. Women faculty face distinct challenges as they navigate the impact of shelter-in-place and social distancing on work and home life. An unequal division of household labor and family care between men and women means women faculty are vulnerable to inequities that may develop in the workplace as they strive to maintain academic productivity and professional development without adequate assistance with domestic tasks and family care. Emerging data suggest that gender differences in academic productivity may be forthcoming as a direct result of the pandemic. Existing gender inequities in professional visibility, networking, and collaboration may be exacerbated as activities transition from in-person to virtual environments and create new barriers to advancement. Meanwhile, initiatives designed to promote gender equity within academic medicine may lose key funding due to the economic impact of COVID-19 on higher education. To ensure that the gender gap within academic medicine does not widen, the authors call upon academic leaders and the broader biomedical community to support women faculty through deliberate actions that promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion. The authors provide several recommendations, including faculty needs assessments; review of gender bias within tenure-clock-extension offers; more opportunities for mentorship, sponsorship, and professional recognition; and financial commitments to support equity initiatives. Leadership for these efforts should be at the institutional and departmental levels, and leaders should ensure a gender balance on task forces and committees to avoid overburdening women faculty with additional service work. Together, these strategies will contribute to the development of a more equitable workforce capable of transformative medical discovery and care.