trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Academic institutions implement targeted retention programs to support women in research.

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
5 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that academic institutions implement targeted retention programs to support women in research?

Yes. Academic institutions widely implement targeted retention and equity programs to address ongoing gender disparities and support women in research and clinical careers.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 5 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

The claim is specific, empirical, and falsifiable, passing Step 0. The retrieved papers consistently document that academic and healthcare institutions implement retention, mentorship, and career advancement programs specifically targeted at women in research and medicine. Therefore, the claim is supported by the evidence.

Evidence for · 5
Recruitment, Promotion and Retention of Women in Academic Medicine: How Institutions Are Addressing Gender Disparities
2017
Demonstrates that academic medical institutions implement targeted recruitment, promotion, and retention programs aimed at women faculty, though coverage varies.
Get citation
Carr, P., Gunn, C. M., Raj, A., Kaplan, S., & Freund, K. (2017). Recruitment, Promotion and Retention of Women in Academic Medicine: How Institutions Are Addressing Gender Disparities. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2016.11.003

See more details
More for · 4
Gender Disparities in Academic Emergency Medicine: Strategies for the Recruitment, Retention, and Promotion of Women
2019
Describes recommended strategies and institutional programs specifically designed to recruit, support, and promote women in academic emergency medicine.
Get citation
Agrawal, P., Madsen, T. E., Lall, M., & Zeidan, A. (2019). Gender Disparities in Academic Emergency Medicine: Strategies for the Recruitment, Retention, and Promotion of Women. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10414

Five Strategies Leaders in Academic Medicine Can Implement Now to Enhance Gender Equity
2023
Emphasizes that leaders in academic medicine must implement immediate retention and equity strategies to support women physicians.
Get citation
Allan, J. M., Brooks, A. K., Crusto, C. A., Feld, L. D., Oxentenko, A. S., Spector, N., Verduzco-Gutierrez, M., & Silver, J. (2023). Five Strategies Leaders in Academic Medicine Can Implement Now to Enhance Gender Equity. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.2196/47933

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Programs in Health Care Institutions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
2026
Finds that health care institutions widely adopt equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives, including career advancement and academic support programs.
Get citation
D, F., A, B., C, H., N, B., S, M., R, S., M, Z., PM, N., R, K., R, K., SG, F., M, S., M, G., M, S., M, S., K, L., B, M., G, W., S, S., S, D., A, A., PA, B., GL, H., & MM, S. (2026). Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Programs in Health Care Institutions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.55896

Diversity in Academic Otolaryngology: Career Outcomes for Underrepresented Groups.
2026
Observes that academic institutions with diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives demonstrate improved female-to-male faculty ratios.
Get citation
L, V., AY, S., G, B., MC, S., & T, S. (2026). Diversity in Academic Otolaryngology: Career Outcomes for Underrepresented Groups.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.109389

Related receipts

What does the evidence say?

The claim is specific, empirical, and falsifiable, passing Step 0. The retrieved papers consistently document that academic and healthcare institutions implement retention, mentorship, and career advancement programs specifically targeted at women in research and medicine. Therefore, the claim is supported by the evidence.

Receipt History
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8904 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work