NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre

Enabling translational research through partnership

MENUMENU
  • About
    • About the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
    • NIHR Oxford BRC impact
    • Steering Committee
    • Promoting equality, diversity and inclusion in research
    • Current Vacancies
    • Stay in Touch
    • Contact Us
  • Research

        • Research Overview
        • Clinical Research Facility
        • Health Economics
        • Ethics in the NIHR Oxford BRC
        • Medical Statistics
        • Infections in Oxfordshire Database (IORD)
        • 15 Research Themes

        • Cancer
        • Cardiovascular Medicine
        • Digital Health from Hospital to Home
        • Gene and Cell Therapy
        • Genomic Medicine
        • Imaging
        • Inflammation across Tissues
        • Life-saving Vaccines
        • Metabolic Experimental Medicine
        • Modernising Medical Microbiology and Big Infection Diagnostics
        • Musculoskeletal
        • Preventive Neurology
        • Respiratory Medicine
        • Surgical Innovation, Technology and Evaluation
        • Translational Data Science
  • Patient and Public Involvement
    • For patients and the public
    • For researchers
    • More information
  • Training Hub
    • Training Hub Overview
    • Clinical Academic Pathway
    • Internships
    • Pre-doctoral Research Fellowships
    • Senior Research Fellowships
    • Research Training Bursaries
    • Doctoral Awards
    • Post-Doctoral Awards
    • PARC Programme
    • Other funding
    • Leadership Training
    • Useful Links
    • Training and Education Resources
    • Upcoming Training Events & Courses
  • Industry
    • Collaborate with Oxford BRC
    • Who Do We Work With?
    • Events
    • Further Information and Additional Resources
    • Contacts for Industry
  • Videos
  • News
  • Events

News

You are here: Home > Other News > Guidelines published on measuring gender inequality in medical research

Guidelines published on measuring gender inequality in medical research

16 August 2016 · Listed under Other News

_DSC4869Guidelines on how to measure more accurately the involvement of women researchers in medical research have been published by a group of senior international academics led by the University of Oxford.

The paper sets out steps that should be taken to measure the under-representation of women in the growing field of international collaborative research and chart progress towards greater equity.

The paper states that, compared to men, women are under-represented among researchers and research participants; receive less funding and benefit less from the outcomes of studies.

It acknowledges the widespread view that gender should be given greater consideration when assessing the performance of university departments.

Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, the authors recommend that institutions systematically measure their efforts to reduce biases against women and create equality of opportunity.

The research was funded by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, a collaboration between the University and Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust to fund research.

The paper’s recommendations include (full list in notes to editors):

  • Funders of research: ensure applicants address gender equity in research design and analyses; commission research on the impact of gender equity on research and find ways to ensure gender equity is part of funding criteria.
  • Research institutions: collect data on gender equity; include gender in assessments of the impact of research and incorporate gender equity in employee appraisals.
  • Research evaluators: assess the impact of gender on research; investigate gender equity in research and its impact and analyse the impact of gender balanced teams.

In examining the reasons for under-representation of women, the paper describes how knowledge and practices are shaped predominantly by male perceptions and norms, which may be influenced by both conscious and unconscious gender bias.

Whilst there is great variety in individual leadership styles, overall women tend to have a less hierarchical and more collaborative approach to leadership – traits that can be very effective when managing collaborative research but which may not be valued in male-dominated organisations.

Promotion criteria in the scientific world may emphasise hierarchical leadership styles and hence unwittingly discriminate against women leaders.

Academic promotion and tenure criteria have also traditionally been based on a male-gendered career trajectory which requires full-time commitment at just the time women may be seeking a more flexible job arrangement to fit in with raising families.  As society changes, these criteria may also discriminate against men who seek to share childcare, hence progress towards more ‘woman-friendly’ promotion criteria is also likely to benefit such men.

Less easily researched will be the problem of ‘backdoor hiring’ practices and the strong influence of gendered network ties (colloquially known as the ‘old boy network’), in academic recruitment and selection.  Because such networks operate informally and subtly, documenting and addressing their biases will pose research challenges.

trish web

Professor Trish Greenhalgh, co-author on the paper (pictured above), said that the UK academic sector had made huge strides towards gender equality in the 30 years she had been working in it. She praised the efforts of The Department of Health’s Chief Medical Officer Professor Dame Sally Davies who has fought tirelessly to create incentives for higher education institutions to address gender inequalities.

Prof Greenhalgh said:  “There is a widespread belief that the opportunities for women in academia has improved greatly over the past two decades, but there is remarkably little hard data to substantiate this claim – and indeed much controversy about what we should be measuring and how.

“I personally have benefited from family-friendly policies, and also lamented the lack of such policies in my early years as an academic.

“As part of the continuing move towards gender – and other forms of – equality in the academic workplace, it’s time to move from impressionistic and anecdotal evidence to hard metrics of progress, which will inform the debate on all sides.”

← Training camp success for BRC student
Improved analysis of genetic testing could lead to more patients with inherited conditions being diagnosed →

Other news

News Categories

News by Month

See all news

Subscribe to the Oxford BRC Newsletter

Keep informed about the work of the Oxford BRC by subscribing to our Mailchimp e-newsletter. It is produced several times a year and delivers news and information about upcoming events straight to your inbox.

Subscribe Now

Feedback

We’d love to hear your feedback. Please contact us at [email protected]

Oxford BRC on Social Media

  • Bluesky
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Threads
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Data Control and Privacy
  • Accessibility
  • Our Partners
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact

Copyright © 2025 NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre