At the Interface Between Medicine, Communication, and Business

With an impressive curriculum including a MD, PhD, and MBA, Shari Langemak has been Editorial Director at the German branch of Medscape for 3 years now. Medscape is an international online magazine that offers information and media resources on a wide range of medical topics destined for healthcare professionals. In addition to this, Shari is also a public speaker at conferences, and a coach for startups, especially in the field of digital health. We sat down to talk to her about how she got here, her thoughts on diversity in tech and much, much more.

What is your role at Medscape?
I am responsible for the production of medical content that enables physicians to stay up to date with their specialty. I work with science writers, medical experts and colleagues from all over the world. Regular discussions with all of them are crucial, as we need to identify the biggest topics in medicine and to stay updated on the latest findings in research. My job also includes quite a bit of traveling, as we make videos with key opinion leaders at international congresses.

Shari Langemak, Editorial Director at Medscape Germany

 How did you get into this field? Why did you decide not to follow medical practice or research?
I appreciated my medical studies a lot, but from the very beginning I felt very intrigued by the entire healthcare industry and was curious about innovation, both medical and technological. I realized quickly that a role in journalism would enable me to understand the healthcare system on a meta level. Somewhat randomly, I got an internship at Axel Springer, wrote quite a lot of articles about topics in medicine for Die Welt and Welt am Sonntag, and continued working as a freelance journalist in addition to my medical studies and my PhD.

"Journalism enables you to get a broader understanding of the healthcare system"

Journalism is very interesting, because you keep up with all the different topics out there. You get a broader understanding of the healthcare system, and you meet many people. So it was a very cool job to do while being a student. After finishing my medical degree, my freelance activity paid off, and I started working as an editor for Die Welt. This was definitely exciting – going from a clinical career to a big media corporation where I had a completely different life!

And when did you do the MBA?
I did my MBA in parallel to my current job at Medscape, as I really like to challenge myself. My main goal is to understand the healthcare system from all the different aspects and stakeholders’ points of view, especially from an entrepreneurial and an economic perspective. I aim to play an active part in the innovation lifecycle. But I realized that without business knowledge, this would not be possible.
I already had the medical and the research point of view, and then journalism, which allowed me to talk to a lot of people from different areas in healthcare. But especially because I work with startups a lot (I am a startup mentor and speak about what the healthcare system might look like in the future), I should know the basic principles of business, finance, and entrepreneurship. So the MBA was a great opportunity for me to catch up with that. I think I now have a broad view of the healthcare system.

What do you like the most about your job?
I like that I can learn about many different topics in medicine. And I love working internationally. And building a product in the German market, while working with very insightful colleagues. I also really like our company culture. We have many women working at Medscape, and they are really tough and smart.

What are some of the challenges of your job?
Media is a tough field, with lots of competition. It’s really hard to get the attention of the reader in a digital world, where everything is so quick. It’s not like you stay at home on a Sunday and read the newspaper anymore. There is so much distraction and information, and competition for the reader’s attention. Also, it is challenging to keep up with the innovation in digital health across the globe. The industry is rapidly evolving, which – to be honest – is also incredibly rewarding.

The world of technology is very male-dominated. Have you gone through any difficulties for being a woman, or experienced inequality?
No, quite the opposite. I'm invited to be a speaker quite often, being a young female, so I cannot say I have a disadvantage. I think people want to hear more diverse opinions, different perspectives. I also see a growing number of women who are founders in the startup scene, including health-tech. I believe that the male domination has other reasons. Many women, or rather girls, maybe pursue the wrong career path because they don’t know that they make great engineers, programmers, and entrepreneurs.

"I personally was a little nerd child"

During school and university we are told that women are not good at tech. I personally was a little nerd child. I used to game, I built my own computer... So I was always around many males. I learned a lot by just playing and being around friends with the same interests – that’s the best way to learn and pick your interests for your career later.

Can you tell us about the Startup Bootcamp where you are a mentor?
It’s an accelerator. Startup Bootcamp helps startups to grow by empowering entrepreneurs with knowledge and network. Many mentors from different areas do this type of work. I coach startups on digital health. I help them with market access, understanding how each player in the health industry thinks, product design, identifying which regulatory challenges they might face – as there are plenty. Many startups are international and want to grow a product in Germany, so they don’t know which problems may come up here.

What do you know now that you wish you had known when you were in university? What would the current Shari tell the student Shari?
Everything is possible! It’s not because you chose one field of study that you will eventually end up in this specific field of work. But it’s also not as if it comes to you. You have to define your path and build your own brand. You should think early in your studies where you want to be, and many options are possible. You have to think about what makes you happy and get an inside view of the job you would like to do, so that you can actually see what it is like – by doing internships, talking to people… And if you still like it, perfect. Then you should think: what do I need to do to get there? Or what kind of skills would this future employer like to see? And then work on these. Academia is one thing, but especially if you want to move into a different field, you need very specific and practical skills. And while you are still studying, you can start developing some of them.

"You have to define your path and build your own brand"

Interview by Mariana Cerdeira, PhD Student, AG Harms
This article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"

Female Voices of the Charité Research Community - part 3

What does it mean to be a female scientist at the Charité? We set out to interview researchers at all career stages, learning about their challenges, hopes, and unfiltered thoughts on being a woman in science. As you will see, not everyone shares the same opinion or experiences...

University women’s representative 

Why do we need woman’s representatives?
As women, we have come along way from not having any rights at all to being members of society that are acknowledged as such, with rights and potential that can be used. But there are still some improvements that need to be done, especially concerning the underrepresentation of women in leading positions- including in academia. Women's representatives are the conscious voice that demand these improvements and make sure that our progress doesn't come to a halt when we are getting close to equality. 
Do you feel that you are treated equally?
I feel treated equally and I cannot say I have encountered any discrimination due to my gender. I believe this is thanks to the hard work of generations of women who fought for their rights as women in society. However, I believe there is still some inequality when it comes to letting women advance to leadership positions and certain disadvantages that come with the biological role of women in having children.

GENDER EQUALITY IS NOT A TRADE-OFF FOR EXCELLENCE!

What needs to be improved?
We need to improve the opportunities of women to reach the top steps of the career ladder. This can be done by improving the compatibility of career and family, by increasing the acceptance of family as something that is a normal progression in life- even at competitive workplaces- and by making people aware that women are as capable as men. We need to stop thinking that gender equality in science can only come at a cost. Gender equality is not a trade-off for excellence!

by josemiguels via pixabay

Postdoc, mid 40s, one child

Do you have a female scientist role model?
Not really, because I do not differentiate between man and woman with respect to intellectual capabilities. And I never had the opportunity to talk to a female professor in this private way how she managed to get there and what she thinks is necessary and one has to leave aside to get there.
Do you feel that you are treated equally?
When I was younger I thought that yes, we are treated equally  But looking back now there are some occasions where I think that is just wrong.
My PhD was rather equal even though my supervisor was a bit more outspoken with his male students. During one of my postdocs I had one supervisor who was borderline sexist. Later on, I also had female bosses, who were far more research-focused and gender-neutral. One was a mother and the other wasn’t, but both welcomed women who decided to start a family. The most sexist man I encountered was when I applied for a postdoc and he asked me if I wanted to start a family and and so on. I reconsidered and retracted my application. However, there are also female professors who have an issue with female postdocs. It always boils down to whether you want to have a family or not. This is the most important fact in regard to gender equality: it is the woman who bears the child. It is almost a biological disadvantage. We have to welcome women who want to start a family. I always found it very strange that many bosses do not welcome children.
What did you struggle with most as a woman in academia?
I guess it gets more difficult the more you advance in your career. It is really difficult to have a break from academia for several month to raise your child – like I did when I became a mum. You are out of the job, out of contact with your colleagues, and out of the progress that happens in the lab. Despite being on maternity leave, the women need to come to the lab every now and then to keep up to date because science will not wait. This is hugely important.
What needs to be improved?
Both sides have to improve. Young people have to honestly ask themselves, "What is my capacity and strength"? The earlier you start thinking where you want to go in life, the better. Also, it is absolutely necessary that young people get more advice from experienced researchers.
What needs to change is the attitude of how we look at young mothers: For example, I remember an Icelandic politician who was in front of a congress with her baby, and breastfeeding while giving an important speech. I think this is so cool- they do not make a fuss about it at all. Another thing: This building (CCO) is great, but it does not even have a room where a pregnant of breastfeeding mother can go to and rest for a moment. There is not even a kindergarten here. The Charité is just starting to build one. Organizations like Charité need to make childcare easier for parents who want to return to their jobs.

Tell yourself every day that you are smart.

 
Another point is finances: The situation is bad in research. It's an insecure job in itself, because we don't know what comes out of our experiments. These short-term contracts are a disgrace for smart and ambitious young people. As women, we really need to consider whether we want to go the whole path from PhD to Professor. It is very difficult, and could be a waste of time.
Your advice for a female scientist?
Go for it! It's tough, it's rough, and it's a fight every day. The best one can do is find colleagues who you can rely on, and who you can collaborate with. Ask yourself "Where do I want to go?". "What kind of restrictions can I live with?". Tell people like your boss what you are willing to deal with and what you are not. Be more self-assured. Women are equally smart as men, but they tend to be more insecure and humble in the way they interact. This is not the right attitude. Tell yourself every day that you are smart.



by Claudia Willmes, AG Eickholt/Schmitz
These interviews have been edited lightly for quality and content.

this article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"

Female Voices of the Charité Research Community - part 2

What does it mean to be a female scientist at the Charité? We set out to interview researchers at all career stages, learning about their challenges, hopes, and unfiltered thoughts on being a woman in science. As you will see, not everyone shares the same opinion or experiences...



PhD Student, 28 years old


Do you feel that you are treated equally?
During my studies I had an encounter with a sexist professor that made inappropriate remarks. That was the first time that I realized that women are still not treated the same way as men. At the moment I have the impression – and this might be just my feeling – that I am looked at differently than a male person would be in my position. I am about to finish my PhD and I think that prospective companies and bosses are hesitant to hire me, because I might drop out soon due to pregnancy.

WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PATCH THE “LEAKY PIPELINE”

 
What needs to be improved?
We need to figure out how to patch the “leaky pipeline” and help more women get access to leadership positions. It is especially critical to provide a surrounding for young woman where they have the certainty that they do not have to choose between family or career. It would help very much if the government would support research institutes more, so that the group leaders can give better contracts to their female PhDs and young postdocs that do not depend so much on getting publications. It's simply detrimental to having a family and pursuing a career; it's hard to get a grant if you did not publish for a year or so, because you were busy with your baby.
What is your fear / hope?
At the moment I feel under pressure to make the right choices so I can both pursue a scientific career and start a family. I hope to secure a job outside academia that offers me a contract that lasts longer than the average position in academia.

via pixabay

Postdoc who left academia, 38, married, kids

What did you struggle most with, as woman in academia?
I actually never had to struggle with being a woman in academia as I always had supportive and fair supervisor and peers.
Why did you leave academia?
Because I learned that I am not made for an academic career and that I have other priorities in my life.

EXCELLENT NEUROSCIENCE CAN’T BE DONE PART-TIME.

 
What needs to be improved?
The whole scientific evaluation system. It is detrimental for good, wide-ranging science to evaluate researchers only by the journals they have published in.
What is your advice to an aspiring female neuroscientist?
You should find out and decide for yourself what is most important for you and then go for it. Try to find good mentors, not necessarily limiting yourself to women or individuals from your field, and ask constantly for advice.
I also believe that excellent neuroscience can’t be done part-time.





by Claudia Willmes, AG Eickholt/Schmitz
These interviews have been edited lightly for quality and content.

this article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"

Female Voices of the Charité Research Community - part 1

What does it mean to be a female scientist at the Charité? We set out to interview researchers at all career stages, learning about their challenges, hopes, and unfiltered thoughts on being a woman in science. As you will see, not everyone shares the same opinion or experiences...

Master's student, 24 years old

Do you feel treated equally to your male peers?
I feel treated equally- I do not have any trouble with gender inequality.
Do you perceive gender-equality in a different way in Germany, compared to your home country?
Gender equality is more common here in Germany than in my home country. Especially after the latest political developments at home, where the government just decided for woman and their bodies. That is a lack of freedom in a way, which is also inequality.
What needs to be improved?
There is always room for improvement, though the situation is already quiet good. The problem for many women in science is that they cannot come back to work easily when they had a child. They do not know how to be in both roles at the same time, and only chose one path. It would be good if co-workers, bosses, and companies would help them more to come back to work and at the same time to be a mother to the children.

I WOULD RATHER USE MY ENERGY TO DO SCIENCE INSTEAD OF FIGHTING FOR MY RIGHTS.

I think that my generation has to understand that we still have to fight for some rights. We shouldn’t just adapt. As I said, the situation is already very good, but there are still things to improve. I think that the younger generation is the one that should do it!
What is your fear / hope?
My fear is that I will burn out too quickly. Women still have to fight for their positions in science and I feel that can be very exhausting in a way. I would rather like to use the energy to do science instead of fighting for my rights.
Do you have a female scientist role model?
I don’t have a specific role model, but I feel that all woman that achieved something in science can be a good role model to look up to.

by Claudia Willmes

Professor, mid 40s, married, kids

Do you have a female scientist role model?
No, most woman in history of science which are famous were somehow cheated by their male counterparts.
Do you feel that you are treated equally?
Now: Mostly. Earlier: No. With my colleagues at the moment, there is equality but there are also circles that I chose not to participate in, as they are not equal
What did you struggle most with as a woman in academia?
Probably the perception from the male counterparts is one of the problems. In Germany women still have the less well-paid jobs. And of course children: As soon as you enter child-bearing age, even if you have no children, it sort of sends a signal to everyone. If you have a child it automatically gets interpreted that you have a second job now, therefore you can’t be 100% a scientist. Men can be fathers without as many problems as woman being mothers.

THE THOUGHT THAT A MOTHER IS NOT PRODUCTIVE IS ACTUALLY COMPLETELY WRONG!

 
What needs to be improved?
There have been a couple of things moving in the right direction. But they haven’t gone far enough. There are some grants for woman to come back to work (though I heard now that the one at the MDC has stopped… ). They used to give you two years after maternity leave – not enough time at all!
The DFG gives you a couple of years grace for every child you have, but again they do not go far enough. It is not just the time that you are pregnant which you need. A child does occupy a lot of your time until it is three or so. The thought that a mother is not productive is actually completely wrong! You actually get more productive. You are less productive during pregnancy and in the first year, but after that you become so good at organizing and multitasking! Once the kids go to school, you are up early – you will always be one of the early birds. And you do not mess around. You have aims. You do not go for your second cup of coffee, you actually do not have a coffee at all. You eat while you work, and you really are much more goal-oriented than others.
What is your advice to an aspiring female neuroscientist?
If you want to have a family, make sure you have a very understanding partner who will do at least 50% of the childcare. It is not possible without a good partnership. It gets really hard in a situation with two people with careers that are equally important. That would be my biggest advice: make sure that your partnership is up to the challenge.



by Claudia Willmes, AG Eickholt/Schmitz
These interviews have been edited lightly for quality and content.

this article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"

Gender Balance in Neuroscience at Charité

Thursday we looked at general participation of women in science, today we are focussing on the figures about female workforce at Charité.

 Looking great, but hiring policies could use an update too!
Image source: Kleist Berlin via Flickr

For many years, German lawmakers have been deeply invested in encouraging the participation of women in the upper echelons of academia, and many programs are in place to support them, from PhD to professorship. But how well is this working for neuroscientists at the Charité?
Charité’s figures about female workforce participation are readily available, and the most recent report details data from 2012-2014 [1]. As a whole, Charité’s workforce is predominantly female: 72% of the organization’s employees are women. This is also mirrored in the student body, where women make up 63% of the total population. Things even out by the time these students gain PhDs: 42% of graduates are female. However, from there, things start to look a little more grim. Only 24% of habilitations in 2014 were women, and 19% of professors.
These statistics examine Charité as a whole, but what about in neuroscience-specific positions? First, we looked at principal investigators (PIs) who were members of Charité’s largest neuroscience research/training group, NeuroCure (including the Neuroscience Research Centre). Out of 51 group leaders mentioned on the website, only 14 (27%) are female [2]. What about in other centers? Since numbers aren’t tabulated in the same way as, say, NeuroCure, we made a rough estimate based on who was named as PI or project leader on departmental websites. Please keep in mind that these numbers may not be current, and that many individuals are also affiliated with NeuroCure and/or multiple institutes (and thus have been counted more than once):

Percentage of female PIs per Charité department:

Centre for Stroke Research: 1/16 or 6% [3]

Institute for Neurophysiology: 1/6 or 17%

Department of Neuropathology: 1/4 or 25% [5]

Department of Experimental Neurology: 0/10 or 0% [6]

Department of Neurology: 7/24 or 29% [7]

Institute of Cell Biology and Neurobiology: 4/10 or 40% [8]

Institute for Integrative Neuroanatomy: 2/5 or 40% [9]


How does your affiliation rank? Have we missed anyone? Let us know at cns-newsletter@charite.de!

by Constance Holman, PhD Student AG Schmitz
this article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"


[1] http://bit.ly/2kBy6x6
[2] http://bit.ly/2kBp9zA
[3] http://bit.ly/2jcFdMa
[4] http://bit.ly/2jcDjv2
[5] http://bit.ly/2jFiCUA
[6] http://bit.ly/2jmwYbK
[7] http://bit.ly/2jxvWNj
[8] http://bit.ly/2ktUpld

Women’s Participation in Science: Crunching the Numbers

Before attempting to solve anything, as scientists, we know that we ought to first map out the extent of the problem. In this article, let’s take a look at gender disparities in terms of some of the most crucial outputs reflecting (and ultimately dictating) a scientist’s success. Here, I focus on some of the metrics that probably cumulatively contribute to the gender bias in attainment of faculty and tenure-track positions and general career progression. 

Overall Participation in Research
According to UNESCO, 28% of researchers and 43% of PhD students in science and engineering are female [1]. But there’s a lot of variability between countries - for example, in many of the former Soviet bloc states, as well as Malaysia and the Philippines, the number of women researchers equals or exceeds male researchers in the natural sciences. Gender parity is also present in many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (Bolivia, Venezuela, Argentina, and Paraguay have more female than male researchers). Women are generally well represented in the medical sciences, but very poorly represented in engineering.

Figure 1. Authorship and gender composition in the JSTOR network dataset. Shaded bars = male authorships, unshaded bars = female authorships. Black line = fraction of authorships that are women, red line = fraction of first authorships that are women, blue line = fraction of last authorships that are women. West, J.D., et al., 2013. The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship. PLoS One

Publication Authorship
Publications are scientific currency. Whether a researcher is looking for a new job, or a department is seeking more funding, the number and quality of publications is very often the difference between success and failure [2].
In total, fewer than 30% of authors of scientific papers (in any authorship position) are women. In neuroscience, only about a third of authors of papers in “high-impact” journals are women. A few countries are doing admirably though: women make up more than 50% of authors in Finland, Poland, and Argentina who publish in top neuroscience journals.
An analysis of the JSTOR corpus in 2013 found that more and more women are publishing as first authors, from about 9% in the 1960's to 31% nowadays, possibly reflecting the increasing proportion of female graduate students [3]. But in the same timeframe, the proportion of last authorships (in biomedical research, a prestigious position reserved for “senior authors”, usually group leaders) by women has increased by just 8%. 

FEMALE PHD STUDENTS ARE LESS LIKELY TO BE LISTED AS AUTHORS 

THAN THEIR MALE COUNTERPARTS

Women are particularly underrepresented as last authors in cell and molecular biology, a field where authorship position matters a great deal [4]. In six leading medical journals, however, senior authorship by females rose sharply from 3.7% to 19.3% from 1970 to 2004 [5]. This underrepresentation might reflect less access to research resources by women, who are more likely to work in low-resource institutions and spend more time teaching than men, than discrimination by journals [6].
A somewhat alarming finding, however, is that female PhD students are less likely to be listed as authors than their male counterparts for the same effort. A recent study followed 336 biology PhD students from 53 institutions throughout the first four years of their programs [7]. They found that, compared to females, males were 15% more likely to author a journal article for every 100 hours they spent on “research tasks”. 

Conference Participation
This one is closely related to publication output. There’s very little data out there on gender balance in conference participation in general (posters, oral presentations), but arguably what really counts in terms of career progression are invited talks. These boost a scientist’s visibility and supports their establishment as a successful researcher.
Jonathan Eisen, a microbiologist at UC Davis, has a collection of self-compiled statistics on different conferences and meetings in his field [8]. His results are far from reassuring - many conferences have no female invited speakers, and the ratios in the others are far from balanced (Professor Eisen often declines invitations from conferences with a marked lack of diversity). In an analysis of participation by gender at emergency medicine conferences, 30% of the speakers were women [9]. A similar figure was found in the language neurobiology field [10]. 

Peer Review
Being invited to review manuscripts for a journal indicates that your colleagues recognize and appreciate your work. Regular exposure to manuscripts and gaining experience in critically evaluating other’s work also likely benefits one’s own research, ultimately fuelling career progress.
Even when taking into account the unbalanced gender ratios in science, women take less part in peer review than men. In an analysis of the 20 journals of the American Geophysical Union (AGU), 20% of reviewers were female, substantially less than the proportion of female first authors in the field (27%) [11]. The explanation wasn’t that editors sought out more senior researchers (who are mostly men), because the low peer review participation was evident across age groups. The study also found that women received fewer invitations by editors and declined them more often than men. In contrast, female editors of the journal Functional Ecology recommended more often female reviewers, who were more likely to agree to review a manuscript than male reviewers [12]. 

Figure 2. Numbers of grants awarded to men and women for different scientific disciplines in the Netherlands, 2010 - 2012. van der Lee, R., Ellemers, N., 2015. Gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

Research Grants and Scientific Awards
In the UK [13] and the US [14], women and men are equally successful in acquiring funding for biomedical research. However, even when accounting for experience, female applicants were awarded almost 45,000 GBP less funding than male applicants from the Wellcome Trust between 2000 and 2008 [15]. Similar results were found in an analysis of infectious disease research funding awarded from private and public sources between 1997 and 2010 [16]. Women received 54,000 GBP less funding than men, with no improvement over the past 14 years. 

MEN WERE EIGHT TIMES MORE LIKELY TO WIN A SCIENTIFIC AWARD

Male applicants for personal grants in the Netherlands had a 20% higher success rate and were perceived as more competent than female colleagues despite similar appraisals of proposal quality [17]. The only field where female success rates were higher than male’s was medical science.
Unfortunately, these discrepancies are not being remedied by the increasing participation of women in science - men continue to receive more than their expected share of scientific prizes (the so-called “Matilda effect”). Between 2000 and 2010, men were eight times more likely to win a scientific award in the physical sciences, mathematics, and biomedicine than women [18]. The same study found that, even when adjusting for the representation of the genders in the pool of nominees for a particular award, men were twice as likely to win than women.


Progress for Science, Through Science
By and large, women are grossly underrepresented in science and they receive less recognition for their work than their male colleagues, a classic vicious cycle. Investigating these gender discrepancies and finding potential solutions should be made a priority. But first we need to recognize that the issue’s complexity warrants the same systematic and rigorous approach that we dedicate to our work as scientists. Striving for equality for the sake of fairness, while extremely important, is only one part of the story. The status quo is such a waste of precious potential - just think about how much more could be done if gender equality in science were a reality. 

by Ahmed Khalil, PhD Student AG Fiebach
this article originally appeared March 2017 in "Diversity in Neuroscience"

[1] UNESCO Science Report, 2015
[2] van Dijk et al., Current Biology, 2014
[3] González-Álvarez and Cervera-Crespo, Journal of Informetrics, 2017
[4] Wren et al., EMBO Reports, 2007
[5] Jagsi et al., NEJM, 2006
[6] Ceci and Williams, PNAS, 2011
[7] Feldon et al., CBE Life Sci Educ, 2016
[8] http://bit.ly/2knYv0N
[9] Carley et al., Emerg Med J, 2016
[10] Peelle, The Winnower, 2016
[11] Lerback and Hanson, Nature, 2017
[12] Fox et al., Funct Ecol, 2016
[13] Blake and La Valle, National Centre for Social Research, 2000
[14] Hosek et al., National Science Foundation, 2005
[15] Bedi et al., Lancet, 2012
[16] Head et al., BMJ Open 2013
[17] van der Lee and Ellemers, PNAS, 2015
[18] Lincoln et al., Soc Stud Sci, 2012