Women's leadership development programmes and gender equality: a systematic review in healthcare, academia and beyond.

IF 12.8 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Daisy Morris, Sana Rauf, Kathleen Riach, Helena Teede
{"title":"Women's leadership development programmes and gender equality: a systematic review in healthcare, academia and beyond.","authors":"Daisy Morris, Sana Rauf, Kathleen Riach, Helena Teede","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2026.104185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women comprise 70% of the global health workforce yet hold only around 25% of leadership positions. Women's leadership development programmes (WLDPs) are widely implemented as organisational equity strategies; this review examined whether their reported outcomes extend beyond individual development to measurable organisational change.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic review without meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42024554419), reported in accordance with PRISMA and SWiM. Nine databases were searched from 25 September 2015 to 5 July 2026. We included peer-reviewed studies evaluating structured WLDPs delivered to adult professionals in formal organisational roles that reported outcomes for women. Student-only populations and mentorship- or coaching-only interventions were excluded. Summary data were extracted from published reports by two independent reviewers using a standardised template incorporating TIDieR intervention-description items; quality was assessed using design-appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Outcomes were mapped using an extended Kirkpatrick framework spanning individual to organisational outcomes.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>From 2314 records, 57 studies evaluating 52 WLDPs across 23 countries were included. Most studies were from the United States (n = 36). Designs were predominantly mixed-methods or qualitative; none used randomisation, and four included comparison groups. All studies reported individual-level outcomes, most commonly self-reported improvements in confidence, knowledge, leadership capability, and behaviour. Thirty-two studies reported any organisational outcome, usually promotion or retention indicators. Subjective measures predominated over objective outcomes. Demographic reporting was limited: only 22 studies reported race or ethnicity, and very few reported sexual orientation, disability, or disaggregated advancement outcomes.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>WLDPs appear to support individual development, but current evidence cannot establish organisational transformation. Their broader equity potential depends on structural accountability: transparent and equitable recruitment pathways, institutional investment, and disaggregated outcome reporting, a reorientation of responsibility from individuals to organisations.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":"99 ","pages":"104185"},"PeriodicalIF":12.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13571131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2026.104185","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Women comprise 70% of the global health workforce yet hold only around 25% of leadership positions. Women's leadership development programmes (WLDPs) are widely implemented as organisational equity strategies; this review examined whether their reported outcomes extend beyond individual development to measurable organisational change.

Methods: Systematic review without meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42024554419), reported in accordance with PRISMA and SWiM. Nine databases were searched from 25 September 2015 to 5 July 2026. We included peer-reviewed studies evaluating structured WLDPs delivered to adult professionals in formal organisational roles that reported outcomes for women. Student-only populations and mentorship- or coaching-only interventions were excluded. Summary data were extracted from published reports by two independent reviewers using a standardised template incorporating TIDieR intervention-description items; quality was assessed using design-appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Outcomes were mapped using an extended Kirkpatrick framework spanning individual to organisational outcomes.

Findings: From 2314 records, 57 studies evaluating 52 WLDPs across 23 countries were included. Most studies were from the United States (n = 36). Designs were predominantly mixed-methods or qualitative; none used randomisation, and four included comparison groups. All studies reported individual-level outcomes, most commonly self-reported improvements in confidence, knowledge, leadership capability, and behaviour. Thirty-two studies reported any organisational outcome, usually promotion or retention indicators. Subjective measures predominated over objective outcomes. Demographic reporting was limited: only 22 studies reported race or ethnicity, and very few reported sexual orientation, disability, or disaggregated advancement outcomes.

Interpretation: WLDPs appear to support individual development, but current evidence cannot establish organisational transformation. Their broader equity potential depends on structural accountability: transparent and equitable recruitment pathways, institutional investment, and disaggregated outcome reporting, a reorientation of responsibility from individuals to organisations.

Funding: The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

妇女领导力发展方案与性别平等:保健、学术界及其他领域的系统审查。
背景:妇女占全球卫生人力的70%,但仅占领导职位的25%左右。妇女领导力发展计划(WLDPs)作为组织公平战略得到广泛实施;这篇综述考察了他们报告的结果是否超越了个人发展,延伸到了可衡量的组织变革。方法:根据PRISMA和SWiM进行系统评价,不进行meta分析(PROSPERO: CRD42024554419)。从2015年9月25日至2026年7月5日检索了9个数据库。我们纳入了同行评议的研究,评估了向正式组织角色的成年专业人员提供的结构化wldp,这些研究报告了女性的结果。排除了仅限学生群体和仅限导师或教练的干预措施。摘要数据由两名独立审稿人使用包含TIDieR干预描述项目的标准化模板从已发表的报告中提取;使用适合设计的乔安娜布里格斯研究所关键评估工具对质量进行评估。结果使用扩展的Kirkpatrick框架映射,从个人到组织结果。研究结果:从2314项记录中,纳入了57项研究,评估了23个国家的52个世界粮食计划署。大多数研究来自美国(n = 36)。设计主要采用混合方法或定性方法;没有一个采用随机化,有四个纳入了对照组。所有研究都报告了个人层面的结果,最常见的是自我报告的自信、知识、领导能力和行为的改善。32项研究报告了任何组织结果,通常是晋升或保留指标。主观测量占主导地位,而不是客观结果。人口统计学报告是有限的:只有22项研究报告了种族或民族,很少有研究报告了性取向、残疾或分类的晋升结果。解释:WLDPs似乎支持个人发展,但目前的证据无法建立组织转型。它们更广泛的公平潜力取决于结构性问责制:透明和公平的招聘途径、机构投资和分类结果报告,即责任从个人向组织的重新定位。资助:澳大利亚国家卫生和医学研究委员会(NHMRC)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
EClinicalMedicine
EClinicalMedicine Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
1.30%
发文量
506
审稿时长
22 days
期刊介绍: eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书