The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review
Abstract
Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic globally disrupted lives and contributed to the exacerbation of pre-existing inequalities. Women in research were also affected. The prominent role that women played in professional and personal care duties had a detrimental effect on their research outputs, potentially hindering their career progression. Moreover, the challenges faced by women academics during the pandemic, including job loss, increased mental health issues, and the intersection of gender with other socio-demographic traits exacerbated existing gender disparities within academia. By systematically scoping the qualitative literature on the experiences of women researchers during the pandemic, this study sought to explore how women experienced and reacted to the challenges generated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative meta synthesis of the included studies revealed three themes: gendered professional expectations, colliding identities and coping strategies. These themes show how gendered roles such as teaching and professional care work, associated with the hierarchical and gendered division of tasks both at home and in the workplace, made women feel unsupported and alienated as relevant agents in the academic context. The study reveals the importance of pastoral care, teaching and service work as the essential backbone of the academic infrastructure, especially in times of crises. It also exposes how productivity-focused researcher assessment criteria, rewarding mainly individual results and unrewarding of care and service work, can be viewed as perpetuating structural inequalities based on gender, parenting situations, contractual situations and background. In conclusion, this study exposes the need to proactively address the gendered practices and implicit biases which reproduce inequalities within academia and highlights how paying attention to the experiences and needs of women researchers is essential for improving the resilience and crises preparedness of academic the system.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Systematic and narrative reviews highlight additional sample-level moderators, including protective and risk factors35–42. These include financial challenges43, self-doubt44, and social and academic loneliness14,45 as risk factors, and suggest social support, a positive and future-oriented mindset, and self-care14 as potential protective factors.”
From Prevalence and severity of mental health problems in early-career researchers: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
In the citing paper
“A broader systematic evaluation of other relevant mental health issues remains lacking, including clinically defined syndromes such as social phobia, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), personality disorders, eating disorders, alcohol and drug abuse, and burnout, as well as common symptoms of psychological”
From Prevalence and severity of mental health problems in early-career researchers: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Citations
Cites
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., et al. (2018) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m18-0850 · Cited by 43,565
Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews.
Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 · Cited by 26,092
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x · Cited by 11,385
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 · Cited by 9,312
De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote
Bramer, W. M., Giustini, D., de Jonge, G. B., Holland, L., & Bekhuis, T. (2016) · Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.014 · Cited by 2,103 · cited 1×
“4 (Clarivate TM), following the Amsterdam Efficient Deduplication (AED) method (Otten et al., 2019) and the Bramer-method (Bramer et al., 2016).”
Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists
Myers, K. R., Tham, W. Y., Yin, Y., Cohodes, N., Thursby, J. G., Thursby, M. C., Schiffer, P., Walsh, J. T., Lakhani, K. R., & Wang, D. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0921-y · Cited by 725
Evolving Concepts of Epistemic Injustice
Fricker, M. (2017) · The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice · doi:10.4324/9781315212043-5 · Cited by 515
Flor, L. S., Friedman, J., Spencer, C. N., Cagney, J., Arrieta, A., Herbert, M. E., Stein, C., Mullany, E. C., Hon, J., Patwardhan, V., et al. (2022) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00008-3 · Cited by 364
Research works printed but not linked: 87
- 10.1108/PR-08-2020-0636 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ajss.2021.03.003 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.260.5106.409 · DOI
- 10.1080/01425692.2022.2074375 · DOI
- 10.1080/0161956X.2022.2054634 · DOI
- 10.1080/07491409.2022.2030607 · DOI
- 10.1002/nha3.20359 · DOI
- 10.1108/02610151311305597 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12750 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-031-34996-6_3 · DOI
- Braun V, Clarke V (2013) Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: Sage.
- 10.1017/S1049096520002036 · DOI
- 10.1108/GM-07-2020-0236 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/gwao.12894 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10755-022-09605-w · DOI
- Connell R (2009) Gender in World Perspective. Malden: Polity Press.
- 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.06.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/14649357.2020.1757891 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31679-2 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12811 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41587-021-01008-0 · DOI
- 10.1177/10690727211057441 · DOI
- 10.3390/socsci12010024 · DOI
- European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (2021) She Figures 2021: Policy Briefs. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
- 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057655 · DOI
- 10.1080/09589236.2022.2125863 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12895 · DOI
- Fraser N, Jaeggi R (2018) Capitalism. A Conversation in Critical Theory. Cambridge: Polity.
- 10.1038/s41467-021-26428-z · DOI
- 10.1038/d41586-020-02183-x · DOI
- 10.1177/13505076211062900 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12696 · DOI
- 10.1186/s12913-021-06411-6 · DOI
- 10.1177/14034948211027816 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0269834 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.wsif.2014.12.002 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12350 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12699 · DOI
- 10.1177/23780231211006977 · DOI
- 10.1111/1468-0432.t01-1-00012 · DOI
- 10.1177/1350506804042097 · DOI
- 10.1080/14616696.2020.1839670 · DOI
- 10.1080/15456870.2022.2123919 · DOI
- 10.1002/nha3.20357 · DOI
- Lorber J (1994) The Paradoxes of Gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
- Manzoor D, Hamid S (2021) Work Life balance during COVID-19 lockdown: Experiences of women academicians of Kashmir. Library Philosophy and Practice 2021: 1–7.
- 10.1177/0192513X211048476 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12823 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10755-021-09586-2 · DOI
- 10.1080/14616696.2020.1809690 · DOI
- 10.1126/sciadv.abd1996 · DOI
- Motherscholar C, Myles-Baltzly C, Ho H, et al. (2021) Transformative collaborations: How a motherscholar research collective survived and thrived during COVID-19. International Perspectives in Psychology Research Practice Consultation 10(4): 197–214.
- 10.1108/EJTD-04-2022-0052 · DOI
- Newlin M, Anthony M (2022) Resilience of female academics in rural South African higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic. African Journal of Gender, Society and Development 11(1): 131–157.
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716341.003.0005 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12346 · DOI
- 10.1111/cars.12295 · DOI
- Otten R, de Vries R, Schoonmade L (2019) Amsterdam Efficien Deduplication Method. Amsterdam: Zenodo.
- Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372: n71.
- 10.1111/gwao.12655 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12618 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002922 · DOI · Paper page
- Ramirez Lozano JP, Bridshaw Araya LC, Brito Ochoa MP (2022) Latin American female academic perceptions about the COVID pandemic’s impact on gender equity and within-country inequality. Research Management 20(2): 169–192.
- 10.38140/pie.v40i4.6190 · DOI
- 10.1177/08912416221075833 · DOI
- 10.1080/14330237.2022.2066343 · DOI
- 10.3389/feduc.2022.770447 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.maturitas.2020.05.009 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12682 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11192-022-04513-4 · DOI
- 10.1080/20590776.2022.2108697 · DOI
- 10.1017/S1049096521000615 · DOI
- Shomotova A, Karabchuk T (2022) Navigating COVID-19: Female Ph.D. students coping with family, academic, and job duties. International Journal of Women's Studies 23(3): 57–75.
- 10.1080/0161956X.2022.2055895 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0257919 · DOI
- 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · DOI · Paper page
- Tronto J (1993) Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for and Ethics of Care. NY/London: Routledge.
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0264265 · DOI
- 10.1038/d41586-020-01294-9 · DOI
- 10.1111/gwao.12751 · DOI
- 10.17159/sajs.2022/13176 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104403 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.wsif.2021.102522 · DOI
- Weil S (1977) Simone Weil Reader. New York: Moyer Bell.
- 10.36951/27034542.2021.033 · DOI
- 10.1111/soc4.12881 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01297 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dreisoerner, A., Goetz, V., Frohnmayer, D., Tran, U. S., Voracek, M., & Nater, U. M. (2026) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-026-02505-5 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Inguaggiato, G., Pallise Perello, C., Verdonk, P., Schoonmade, L., Andanda, P., van den Hoven, M., & Evans, N.
- Venue
- Research Ethics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-03-08
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 780-811
- ISSN
- 1747-0161
- 2047-6094
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 8
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/17470161241231268
- The paper
- Inguaggiato, G., Pallise Perello, C., Verdonk, P., Schoonmade, L., Andanda, P., van den Hoven, M., & Evans, N. (2024). The experience of women researchers during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review. Research Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161241231268