Factors impacting on retention, success and equitable participation in clinical academic careers: a scoping review and meta-thematic synthesis

Abstract

Strengths and limitations of this study ► Our review consolidates the full continuum of factors affecting equitable participation in clinical academia at all stages of the pipeline and across a range of protected characteristics. ► Our findings will have limited relevance to nursing, midwifery, allied health professions or other geographies where there may be divergent issues in relation to gender, sexuality and ethnicity or the nature of clinical academia. ► The majority of papers identified in the scoping review focused on gender, therefore the factors identified within each theme may not fully represent issues related to ethnicity and sexual orientation. No studies related to disability were identified. ► Policy is in constant transition and it will need to be studied and addressed locally. This paper focused on current UK policy as an illustrative case. AbStrACtObjectives To examine and synthesise current evidence on the factors that affect recruitment, retention, participation and progression within the clinical academic pathway, focusing on equitable participation across protected characteristics including gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation. Design Scoping review and meta-thematic synthesis. Data sources Web of Science, Google Scholar. Article selection We conducted a scoping review of English language articles on factors affecting recruitment, retention, progression and equitable participation in clinical academic careers published in North America, Australasia and Western Europe between January 2005 and April 2019. The most recent and relevant 39 articles were selected for meta-thematic synthesis using detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data extraction The articles were purposively sampled to cover protected characteristics and career stages and coded for factors related to equitable participation. 17 articles were fully coded. No new themes arose after nine papers. Themes and higher level categories were derived through an iterative consensual process. results 13 discrete themes of factors impacting on equitable participation were identified including societal attitudes and expectations; national and organisational policies, priorities and resourcing; academic and clinical workplace cultures; supportive, discriminatory and compensatory interpersonal behaviours and personal factors related to social capital, finances, competing priorities, confidence and ambition, and orientation to clinical, academic and leadership roles.Conclusions The broad and often interconnected nature of these factors suggests that interventions will need to address structural and cultural factors as well as individual needs. In addition to standard good practice on equality and diversity, we suggest that organisations provide equitable support towards early publication success and targeted mentoring; address financial and role insecurity; address the clinical workplace culture; mitigate clinical-academic-personal role conflicts and overload; ensure that promotional structures and processes encourage diverse applicants an...

Representation of women in sport sciences research, publications, and editorial leadership positions: are we moving forward?

“…Women face several barriers to advance in their academic career, including slower promotions compared with men, lack of career flexibility, lack of mentorship, higher likelihood of being affected by work-life imbalance, or stereotyping (women being more likely to be perceived as professors and men as researchers). [16][17][18] The lack of female role models, as well as generalized societal discouragement about the potential of women to become scientists or experts in the field, might also preclude attracting female talent in sport sciences, 1 resulting in women not pursuing a scientific career in this field. This could require actions at different educational levels to encourage women to become sport sciences professionals and scientists.…”

Multimethods study comparing the experiences of medical clinical academics with nurses, midwives and allied health professionals pursuing a clinical academic career

“…In interviews, MCAs were asked for their perspectives on combining clinical academic careers with family life. These themes arose unsolicited in the NMAHPs' interviews and were considered important to pursue in a comparative study because of concerns around diversity, particularly at higher levels 13 and suggestions that difficulty in achieving a good work-life balance could be a barrier to clinical academic career progression. 7 A link to the survey was distributed through a clinical academic network for NMAHPs 17 and a database of 263 MCA trainees.…”

Is there gender bias in research grant success in social sciences?: Hong Kong as a case study

“…hku.hk/hku-10-mentorship-program.html). Continuous efforts to create integrated support for working women are needed, including more informed decision-making tools for family and career, more family-friendly meeting times and child care support, allowing part-time working plan, remote working, and paid parental leave for both fathers and mothers (Mejia, 2010;Zakaib, 2011;Boyle et al, 2015;Vassie et al, 2020). For funding agencies, strategies to shape the representativeness of women in research funders, universities, departments, and other committees responsible for public spending can be impactful.…”