S. Soklaridis is a senior scientist, Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, and associate professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5119-8473 .
G. Black is a research analyst, Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Department of Education, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Acad Med. 2023 Jan 1;98(1):123-135. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004971. Epub 2022 Sep 20.
The COVID-19 pandemic presented new barriers and exacerbated existing inequities for physician scholars. While COVID-19's impact on academic productivity among women has received attention, the pandemic may have posed additional challenges for scholars from a wider range of equity-deserving groups, including those who hold multiple equity-deserving identities. To examine this concern, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature through an intersectionality lens.
The authors searched peer-reviewed literature published March 1, 2020, to December 16, 2021, in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed. The authors excluded studies not written in English and/or outside of academic medicine. From included studies, they extracted data regarding descriptions of how COVID-19 impacted academic productivity of equity-deserving physician scholars, analyses on the pandemic's reported impact on productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, and strategies provided to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academic productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups.
Of 11,587 unique articles, 44 met inclusion criteria, including 15 nonempirical studies and 29 empirical studies (22 bibliometrics studies, 6 surveys, and 1 qualitative study). All included articles focused on the gendered impact of the pandemic on academic productivity. The majority of their recommendations focused on how to alleviate the burden of the pandemic on women, particularly those in the early stages of their career and/or with children, without consideration of scholars who hold multiple and intersecting identities from a wider range of equity-deserving groups.
Findings indicate a lack of published literature on the pandemic's impact on physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, including a lack of consideration of physician scholars who experience multiple forms of discrimination. Well-intentioned measures by academic institutions to reduce the impact on scholars may inadvertently risk reproducing and sustaining inequities that equity-deserving scholars faced during the pandemic.
COVID-19 大流行给医师学者带来了新的障碍，并加剧了现有的不平等。虽然 COVID-19 对女性学术生产力的影响已经引起了关注，但大流行可能对来自更广泛权益群体的学者提出了额外的挑战，包括那些具有多种权益身份的学者。为了研究这一问题，作者从交叉性视角对文献进行了范围界定审查。
作者在 Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid Embase 和 PubMed 中搜索了 2020 年 3 月 1 日至 2021 年 12 月 16 日发表的同行评审文献。作者排除了非英文发表和/或不属于学术医学的研究。从纳入的研究中，他们提取了有关 COVID-19 如何影响权益学者的学术生产力、关于大流行对权益学者生产力的报告影响的分析以及为减少 COVID-19 对权益学者学术生产力的影响而提供的策略的数据。
在 11587 篇独特的文章中，有 44 篇符合纳入标准，包括 15 篇非实证研究和 29 篇实证研究（22 篇文献计量学研究、6 项调查和 1 项定性研究）。所有纳入的文章都集中在大流行对学术生产力的性别影响上。他们的大多数建议都集中在如何减轻大流行对女性的负担上，特别是那些处于职业生涯早期和/或有孩子的女性，而没有考虑到来自更广泛权益群体的具有多种和交叉身份的学者。
研究结果表明，关于大流行对权益学者的影响的文献很少，包括缺乏对经历多种形式歧视的医师学者的考虑。学术机构为减少对学者的影响而采取的善意措施可能会无意中复制和维持权益学者在大流行期间面临的不平等。
