scholarly journals Part-time training in psychiatry: what trainees want

1991 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 614-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina P. Routh

The proportion of female medical graduates has steadily risen in the past decade. Although it may be argued that men should take on an equal share of the child-rearing and housekeeping roles of the housewife, there is evidence that women doctors are falling behind in their careers because of domestic pressures (Rhodes, 1990). Part-time work is perceived in theory as being a suitable option for women doctors with domestic commitments, but the number who choose this option in practice is surprisingly small. The following study sought to establish what demand there is for part-time training in psychiatry among junior doctors and whether what is on offer meets that demand.

BMJ ◽  
1963 ◽  
Vol 2 (5364) ◽  
pp. 1066-1066
Author(s):  
E. Ettlinger

BMJ ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 3 (5765) ◽  
pp. 53-53
Author(s):  
E. M. Pitt

BMJ ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 3 (5668) ◽  
pp. 477-477
Author(s):  
H. Hill

Author(s):  
S.S. Hasanova ◽  
R.R. Hatueva ◽  
A.L. Arsaev

This article discusses the pros and cons of applying professional income tax. Professional income tax is not mandatory, but an alternative way to pay 2 taxes on self-employment or part-time work. The introduction of this tax can mediate an increase in revenues to the state budget, which is of particular importance for the country in post-crisis conditions.


Author(s):  
Maeve O'Sullivan ◽  
Christine Cross ◽  
Jonathan Lavelle

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
David S. Pedulla ◽  
Michael J. Donnelly

Abstract The social and economic forces that shape attitudes toward the welfare state are of central concern to social scientists. Scholarship in this area has paid limited attention to how working part-time, the employment status of nearly 20% of the U.S. workforce, affects redistribution preferences. In this article, we theoretically develop and empirically test an argument about the ways that part-time work, and its relationship to gender, shape redistribution preferences. We articulate two gender-differentiated pathways—one material and one about threats to social status—through which part-time work and gender may jointly shape individuals’ preferences for redistribution. We test our argument using cross-sectional and panel data from the General Social Survey in the United States. We find that the positive relationship between part-time employment, compared to full-time employment, and redistribution preferences is stronger for men than for women. Indeed, we do not detect a relationship between part-time work and redistribution preferences among women. Our results provide support for a gendered relationship between part-time employment and redistribution preferences and demonstrate that both material and status-based mechanisms shape this association.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S357-S357
Author(s):  
Jennifer Manne-Goehler ◽  
Douglas Krakower ◽  
Jasmine R Marcelin ◽  
Carlos Del Rio ◽  
Wendy Stead

Abstract Background Recent evidence has shown substantial disparities in the rate of advancement to full professorship among women as compared to men faculty in academic infectious diseases (ID). We sought to identify barriers to academic advancement overall and by gender among faculty physicians in this field. Methods We conducted a web-based survey of academic faculty in ID. The survey was made available to the IDWeek2019 attendees and digitally via email and social media to the IDSA membership at large from 9/18/19 – 11/8/2019. The survey assessed demographic characteristics and barriers to faculty advancement and achievement, building on prior research. Survey themes included faculty promotion track, part-time work history and a suite of questions about workplace atmosphere and policies related to career advancement. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to evaluate the association between these factors and full professorship. Results Of 1,036 respondents, 790 were retained in the final dataset [Men: 322 (40.7%), Women: 458 (58.0%), Other: 10 (1.3%)]. 352 respondents were Instructors or Assistant Professors (38.5%), 198 were Associate Professors (25.1%) and 240 were Full Professors (30.4%). Fewer women reported that their promotion process was transparent (57.4% v. 67.6%, p=0.004) and more women Full Professors felt they had been “sponsored” compared to men at their same rank (73.3% v. 53.6%, p=0.002). In regression analyses (Table 1), gender, publications and clinical trial leadership were significantly associated with full professor rank and promotion transparency and NIH grants emerged as possible correlates of this outcome. Salary support, part-time work, women in leadership, faculty promotion track and sponsorship were not associated with this outcome. Table 1. Results of Poisson regression analysis Conclusion Sponsorship and transparency of promotion criteria differed by gender and emerged as potentially important factors associated with full professorship in academic ID. Future policies to promote equity in advancement should address these issues. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document