Boulicault, M., A. C. Danielsen, J. Bruch, A. Tarrant, A. Borsa, and S. Richardson. “
Socially Relevant Variables In US State COVID-19 Surveillance Reporting: A Report Card .”
Health Affairs Blog, 2020, July 14.
Publisher's VersionAbstractThe Harvard GenderSci Lab developed a scoring scheme and
Report Card to evaluate the comprehensiveness of socially relevant, intersectional data publicly reported by each state. We scored each state on their reporting of selected socially relevant variables (age, sex/gender, race/ethnicity, and comorbidity status), and on reporting of interactions between these variables. The results document the paucity of comprehensive disaggregated COVID-19 surveillance reporting among states. Only three states received an “A”, while 30 states received a “D” grade or lower.
Pico, Tamara, Paul Bierman, Kevin Doyle, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
First Authorship Gender Gap in the Geosciences.”
Earth and Space Science 7, no. 8 (2020): e2020EA001203.
Publisher's VersionAbstract
Although gender parity has been reached at the graduate level in the geosciences, women remain a minority in faculty positions. First authorship of peer‐reviewed scholarship is a measure of academic success and is often used to project potential in the hiring process. Given the importance of first author publications for hiring and advancement, we sought to quantify whether women are underrepresented as first authors relative to their representation in the field of geoscience. We compiled first author names across 13 leading geoscience journals from January 2013 to April 2019 (n 1⁄4 35,183). Using a database of 216,286 names from 79 countries, across 89 languages, we classified the likely gender associated with each author's given (first) name. We also estimated the gender distribution of authors who publish using only initials, which may itself be a strategy employed by some women to preempt perceived (and actual) gender bias in the publication process. Female names represent 13–30% of all first authors in our database and are substantially underrepresented relative to the proportion of women in early career positions (30–50%). The proportion of female‐name first authors varies substantially by subfield, reflecting variation in representation of women across geoscience subdisciplines. In geoscience, the quantification of this first authorship gender gap supports the hypothesis that the publication process—namely, achievement or allocation of first authorship—is biased by social factors, which may modulate career success of women in the sciences.
Borsa, Alexander, Joseph Bruch, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
When private equity firms invest in women’s health clinics, who benefits? .”
STAT, 2020, Sep. 14.
Publisher's VersionAbstract
The increasing influence of private equity in a range of health care delivery settings such as physician staffing, nursing homes, and hospitals is not new. But our research reveals a precipitous rise of private equity activity in women’s health. The recent rise of private equity in this area marks a novel form of investor attention with unknown implications. To determine how the incentives of private equity firms interact with clinicians’ mission of caring for women, policymakers, researchers, and the general public need to stay vigilant. Deals between private equity firms and health care providers should be transparent, and ethical standards should be put in place to ensure that profits don’t get in the way of people, and that patients are able to access comprehensive, equitable, and affordable care.
Bruch, Joseph D., Alexander Borsa, Zirui Song, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
Expansion of Private Equity Involvement in Women’s Health Care.”
JAMA Internal Medicine 180, no. 11 (2020): 1542–1545.
Publisher's VersionAbstract
We document formerly non–private equity women’s health care companies, including physician networks, practices, and fertility clinics, that gained a private equity affiliation between 2010 and 2019. This analysis shows a substantial increase in private equity affiliations in women’s health care since 2017. Private equity–affiliated OB/GYN offices are located in urban locations, with an average 2017 median household income 24% higher than the 2017 national average. How the incentives of private equity firms interact with the clinical mission of women’s health is a critical area of inquiry. Future debate about private equity in women’s health will likely be shaped by the associations between economic incentives and quality of care, elective or cosmetic procedures, and access to reproductive health services, especially among low-income, LGBTQIA, and other disadvantaged populations.
Commentary: Private Equity, Women’s Health, and the Corporate Transformation of American Medicine
jamainternal_bruch_2020_ld_200049_1603479564.31041_2.pdf Boulicault, Marion, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
Analyzing COVID-19 Sex Difference Claims: The Harvard GenderSci Lab.”
APA Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy 20, no. 1 (2020): 3-7.
Publisher's VersionAbstractSince March 2020, our group at the Harvard GenderSci Lab has been critiquing sex essentialist explanations of COVID-19 outcome disparities. Using interdisciplinary tools from feminist philosophy, science studies, and critical public health, we work collaboratively to critically examine COVID-19 sex-difference research and to explore and elevate the role of social variables in driving biological disparities. We argue that, in public health research and messaging, data on sex disparities must be contextualized to avoid reinforcing harmful sex essentialist assumptions and to help the public understand how social factors influence these patterns. In the case of COVID-19, doing so can clarify risks and save lives. Here, we describe our methods and share some of our findings.
Shattuck-Heidorn, Heather, Meredith W. Reiches, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
What’s Really Behind the Gender Gap in Covid-19 Deaths?”
The New York Times, 2020, June 24.
Publisher's VersionAbstractA few months into the first wave of the Covid-19 epidemic, men in aggregate appear to have higher fatality rates. But ascribing this outcome to biological sex-related variables, as some have rushed to do, is unlikely to lead to effective interventions. In past epidemics, what at first appeared to be a sex difference turned out to be largely a result of the difference in life experiences between women and men. Occupations, behaviors and pre-existing conditions mattered more than whether one was a woman or a man.
Reiches, Meredith, and Sarah S. Richardson. “
We Dug Into Data to Disprove a Myth About Women in STEM.”
Slate, 2020, Feb. 11.
Publisher's VersionAbstract
The argument used to be that women were simply biologically less capable. Now it’s that they’re less interested. Both are wrong.