Mariam Mousa

Ms. Mariam Mousa

Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

6Years (2021-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 August 2021 in eClinicalMedicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
JBJacqueline Boyle
Jacqueline Boyle
HSHelen Skouteris
Helen Skouteris
AMAlexandra K Mullins
Alexandra K Mullins
GCGraeme Currie
Graeme Currie
HTHelena Jane Teede
Helena Jane Teede
Women are underrepresented in healthcare leadership, yet evidence on impactful organisational strategies, practices and policies that advance women's careers are limited. We aimed to explore these across sectors to gain insight into measurably advancing women in leadership in healthcare. A systematic review was performed across Medline via OVID; Medline in-process and other non-indexed citations via OVID; PsycINFO and SCOPUS from January 2000 to March 2021. Methods are outlined in a published protocol registered a priori on PROSPERO (CRD42020162115). Eligible studies reported on organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership with at least one measurable outcome. Studies were assessed independently by two reviewers. Identified interventions were organised into categories and meta-synthesis was completed following the ‘ENhancing Transparency in REporting the synthesis of Qualitative research’ (ENTREQ) statement. There were 91 eligible studies from 6 continents with 40 quantitative, 38 qualitative and 13 mixed methods studies. These spanned academia, health, government, sports, hospitality, finance and information technology sectors, with around half of studies in health and academia. Sample size, career stage and outcomes ranged broadly. Potentially effective interventions consistently reported that organisational leadership, commitment and accountability were key drivers of organisational change. Organisational intervention categories included i) organisational processes; ii) awareness and engagement; iii) mentoring and networking; iv) leadership development; and v) support tools. A descriptive meta-synthesis of detailed strategies, policies and practices within these categories was completed. This review provides an evidence base on organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership across diverse settings, with lessons for healthcare. It transcends the focus on the individual to target organisational change, capturing measurable change across intervention categories. This work directly informs a national initiative with international links, to enable women to achieve their career goals in healthcare and moves beyond the focus on barriers to solutions.

1 April 2024 in Archives of Women's Mental Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJocelyn R. Clarke
Jocelyn R. Clarke
MGMelanie Gibson-Helm
Melanie Gibson-Helm
MSMelissa Savaglio
Melissa Savaglio
RNRhea Navani
Rhea Navani
MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
JBJacqueline A. Boyle
Jacqueline A. Boyle
Purpose: This systematic review aimed to determine if digital screening for mental health in pregnancy and postpartum is acceptable, feasible and more effective than standard care (paper-and pen-based screening or no screening). The second aim was to identify barriers and enablers to implementing digital screening in pregnancy and postpartum. Method: OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Joanna Briggs Database and All EMB reviews incorporating Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OVID) were systematically searched for articles that evaluated digital screening for mental health in pregnancy and postpartum between 2000 and 2021. Qualitative articles were deductively mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Results: A total of 34 articles were included in the analysis, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies. Digital screening was deemed acceptable, feasible and effective. TDF domains for common barriers included environmental context and resources, skills, social/professional role and identity and beliefs about consequences. TDF domains for common enablers included knowledge, social influences, emotion and behavioural regulation. Conclusion: When planning to implement digital screening, consideration should be made to have adequate training, education and manageable workload for healthcare professionals (HCP’s). Organisational resources and support are important, as well as the choice of the appropriate digital screening assessment and application setting for women. Theory-informed recommendations are provided for both healthcare professionals and women to inform future clinical practice.

11 July 2022 in eClinicalMedicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
HSHelen Skouteris
Helen Skouteris
JBJacqueline A. Boyle
Jacqueline A. Boyle
GCGraeme Currie
Graeme Currie
KRKathleen Riach
Kathleen Riach
HTHelena J. Teede
Helena J. Teede
Gender inequity in healthcare leadership persists and progress is slow, with the focus firmly on problems, barriers and on requiring women themselves to adapt and compete in a system not designed for them. Women are individually burdened to advance their careers, with little effort given to addressing systemic barriers in the health sector. A recent systematic review prioritised organisational-level approaches and demonstrated effective interventions. In this meta-ethnographic study, we further this work by examining factors in implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership. The meta-ethnographic framework applied here follows the Noblit and Hare approach for synthesising findings and applying interpretive analysis to original research. We generated a new line-of-argument with insights for the healthcare sector. The protocol is registered (CRD42020162115) on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Three academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS) were searched systematically between 2000 and 2021. Studies were analysed if they included organisational-level interventions that sought to measurably advance women in leadership. Study characteristics were extracted using a standard template for intervention details. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data synthesis was conducted across 19 criteria of the Meta-Ethnography Reporting Guide (eMERGe). Fifteen qualitative studies were included. Analysis revealed three meta-themes that are central to successful implementation of organisational interventions that advance women in healthcare leadership: (1) leadership commitment and accountability, influenced by internal and external organisational settings, salient for long term outcomes and for developing an inclusive leadership culture; (2) intervention fit with individuals with consideration given to personal beliefs, preferences, experiences, capabilities or life circumstances, including capacity for leadership roles in their broader life context; balanced against maintaining interventional fidelity, and (3) cultural climate and organisational readiness for change, addressing traditional, conservative and constrictive perspectives on gender and leadership in health, highlighting the facilitating role of male colleagues. This meta-ethnographic research extends past work by integrating empirical evidence from a systematic literature review of effective organisational level interventions, with the identification of pragmatic themes to generate, implement, evaluate and embed evidence-based organisational interventions to advance women in healthcare leadership. This work can inform initiatives and policymakers to generate and implement new knowledge to advance women in healthcare leadership. Epworth Health and Monash University provided scholarships for MM. HT is funded by an NHMRC / MRFF Practitioner Fellowship, JB by an NHMRC fellowship and HS by a Monash Warwick University Professorship.

1 March 2023 in JAMA Network Open
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
BGBelinda Garth
Belinda Garth
JBJacqueline A. Boyle
Jacqueline A. Boyle
KRKathleen Riach
Kathleen Riach
HTHelena Jane Teede
Helena Jane Teede
Women continue to be underrepresented in health care leadership, limiting leadership diversity.1,2 There is broad awareness of the need for greater equity in leadership to retain an invaluable workforce and reduce current attrition rates following the COVID-19 pandemic.3-5 Research also shows that greater gender diversity in health care leadership is a key step toward eliminating health care disparities and improving quality of care, leading to more equity in health and social justice and improved health care outcomes for women and children.3-6 This provides a strong imperative for prioritizing greater diversity and equity in leadership for the health care sector.7-12

7 December 2023 in Journal of Nursing Management
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MBMihirika Surangi de Silva Pincha Baduge
Mihirika Surangi de Silva Pincha Baduge
MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
BGBelinda Garth
Belinda Garth
LBLeanne Boyd
Leanne Boyd
HTHelena Jane Teede
Helena Jane Teede
Aim. We aimed to undertake a systematic review focusing on organisational strategies that specifically advance women nurses in healthcare leadership. Background. Despite nursing being the largest health workforce and being dominated by women, they face significant barriers in career progression and have limited leadership opportunities, with a need to move from a focus on individuals to organisational level change. Methods. Methods for our overarching systematic review are published and follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Databases searched include MEDLINE via OVID; MEDLINE in-process and other nonindexed citations via OVID; PsycINFO; and Scopus. Any study describing a strategy that was not implemented for nurses and all non-peer-reviewed studies were excluded. Included studies were appraised using CASP checklists. A thematic analysis approach was employed to facilitate the systematic generation of themes. Results. Findings were reported under two main themes: leadership barriers and enablers and organisational strategies for advancing women nurses to leadership. The latter included: mentorship, leadership training, career planning and coaching, opportunities for networking, sponsorship, and targeted recruitment processes for increasing gender diversity in leadership roles. Conclusion. This review synthesises organisational-level strategies that advance women nurses in healthcare leadership. Barriers and individual-level strategies for advancing women nurses in healthcare leadership have been extensively studied in the current literature. Systems and organisational strategies are less studied yet show that they can advance women in nursing into healthcare leadership. Implications for Nursing Management. This paper suggests that optimising women nurses leadership attainment needs to shift focus from individual strategies to systemic level and organisational strategies and use tailored evidenced-based approaches.

MMMariam Mousa
Mariam Mousa
HTHelena Jane Teede
Helena Jane Teede
BGBelinda Garth
Belinda Garth
IWIngrid M. Winship
Ingrid M. Winship
LPLuis Prado
Luis Prado
JBJacqueline A. Boyle
Jacqueline A. Boyle
Background: Few studies address how to prioritise organisational interventions that advance women in leadership. We report on the relevance, feasibility and importance of evidence-based interventions for a large healthcare organisation. This study supports the first stage of implementation in a large National Health and Medical Research Council funded initiative seeking to advance women in healthcare leadership. Methods: An expert multi-disciplinary panel comprised of health professionals and leaders from a large healthcare network in Australia participated. The initial Delphi survey was administered online and results were presented in a Nominal Group Technique workshop. Here, the group made sense of the survey results, then evaluated findings against a framework on implementation criteria. Two further consensus surveys were conducted during the workshop. Results: Five priority areas were identified. These included: 1. A committed and supportive leadership team; 2. Improved governance structures; 3. Mentoring opportunities; 4. Leadership training and development; and 5. Flexibility in working. We describe the overall priority setting process in the context of our findings. Conclusions: With evidence and expert input, we established priorities for advancing women in healthcare leadership with a partnering healthcare organisation. This approach can be adapted in other settings, seeking to advance women in leadership.