RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To summarise quantitative evaluations of interventions designed to support the careers of women in academia of any discipline. METHOD: A systematic search of English entries in PubMed, CINAHL and Google Scholar was conducted in September 2017. Methodological quality of the studies was independently assessed by two authors using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality appraisal checklists. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in methods and outcomes; results were synthesised and displayed narratively. RESULTS: Eighteen eligible studies were identified, mostly evaluating programmes in academic medicine departments. The most common interventions were mentoring, education, professional development and/or networking programmes. All programmes took a 'bottom-up' approach in that women were responsible for opting into and devoting time to participation. Study quality was low overall, but all studies reported positive outcomes on at least one indicator. Most often this included improvements in self-rated skills and capabilities, or satisfaction with the programme offered. Results regarding tangible outcomes were mixed; while some studies noted improvements in promotion, retention and remuneration, others did not. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that targeted programmes have the potential to improve some outcomes for women in academia. However, the studies provide limited high-quality evidence to provide information for academic institutions in terms of the best way to improve outcomes for women in academia. The success of an intervention appears to be undermined when it relies on the additional labour of those it is intending to support (ie, 'bottom-up' approaches). As such, academic institutions should consider and evaluate the efficacy of 'top-down' interventions that start with change in practice of higher management.
Asunto(s)
Centros Médicos Académicos , Selección de Profesión , Médicos Mujeres/provisión & distribución , Movilidad Laboral , Toma de Decisiones , Femenino , Humanos , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
AIM: An adapted ethnographic approach was used to explore household factors that influence family fruit and vegetable consumption when access and cost barriers are removed. 'Structural' barriers, such as food affordability and accessibility, are likely to influence fruit and vegetable consumption in disadvantaged households, but households may require additional resources (human and social) to increase consumption. METHODS: Five low-income and five high-income households with children (N = 39 individuals) were observed in their home environment for three months. Including both advantaged and disadvantaged families allowed exploration of socioeconomic factors influencing these households. Each household received a free box of fresh fruit and vegetables each week for 10-12 weeks, delivered to their home, and were home-visited twice a week by a researcher (40+ hours per household). An inductive analysis of rich observational and discussion data revealed themes describing factors influencing household fruit and vegetable consumption. RESULTS: Household food cultures were dynamic and influenced by available resources. Even when free produce was delivered to homes, these households required human resource (personal drivers influenced by early life exposure and household dynamics) and external social networks to make use of them. When household finances and/or labour were limited, there was greater dependence on external organisations for tangible support. CONCLUSIONS: Even when structural barriers were removed, disadvantaged families needed a range of resources across the life course to improve eating behaviours, including sufficient, motivated and skilled labour and harmonious family relationships. Strategies targeting these households must consider structural, social, cultural and intra-familial influences on food choice.