PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Groneberg, D.A.Subject: search.filters.subject.Gender

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Global architecture of gestational diabetes research: Density-equalizing mapping studies and gender analysis Open PDF 
    (2016)
    Brüggmann, D.
    ;
    Richter, T.
    ;
    Klingelhöfer, D.
    ;
    Gerber, A.
    ;
    Bundschuh, M.
    Objective: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with substantial morbidity for mothers and their offspring. While clinical and basic research activities on this important disease grow constantly, there is no concise analysis of global architecture of GDM research. Hence, it was the objective of this study to assess the global scientific performance chronologically, geographically and in relation to existing research networks and gender distribution of publishing authors. Study design: On the basis of the New Quality and Quantity Indices in Science (NewQIS) platform, scientometric methods were combined with modern visualizing techniques such as density equalizing mapping, and the Web of Science database was used to assess GDM-related entries from 1900 to 2012. Results: Twelve thousand five hundred four GDM-related publications were identified and analyzed. The USA (4295 publications) and the UK (1354 publications) dominated the field concerning research activity, overall citations and country-specific Hirsch-Index, which quantified the impact of a country's published research on the scientific community. Semi-qualitative indices such as country-specific citation rates ranked New Zealand and the UK at top positions. Annual collaborative publications increased steeply between the years 1990 and 2012 (71 to 1157 respectively). Subject category analysis pointed to a minor interest of public health issues in GDM research. Gender analysis in terms of publication authorship revealed a clear dominance of the male gender until 2005; then a trend towards gender equity started and the activity of female scientists grew visibly in many countries. The country-specific gender analysis revealed large differences, i.e. female scientists dominated the scientific output in the USA, whereas the majority of research was published by male authors in countries such as Japan. Conclusion: This study provides the first global sketch of GDM research architecture. While North-American and Western-European countries were dominating the GDM-related scientific landscape, a disparity exists in terms of research output between developed and low-resource countries. Since GDM is linked to considerable mortality and morbidity of mothers and their offspring and constitutes a tremendous burden for the healthcare systems in underserved countries, our findings emphasize the need to address disparities by fostering research endeavors, public health programs and collaborative efforts in these nations. © 2016 Brüggmann et al.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The gender gap in highest quality medical research: A scientometric analysis of the representation of female authors in highest impact medical journals Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    ;
    Wanke, E.M.
    ;
    Benik, S.
    ;
    Schehadat, M.S.
    ;
    Schöffel, N.
    Objective The study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-impact medical research, analyzing the representation of female authorships from January, 2008 to September, 2017. Methods 133893 male and female authorships from seven high-impact medical journals were analyzed. The key methodology was the combined analysis of the relative frequency, odds ratio and citations of female authorships. The Prestige Index measures the distribution of prestigious authorships between the two genders. Results 35.0% of all authorships and 34.3% of the first, 36.1% of the co- and 24.2% of the last authorships were held by women. Female authors have an odds ratio of 0.97 (KI: 0.93-1.01) for first, 1.36 (KI: 1.32-1.40) for co- und 0.57 (KI: 0.54-0.60) for last authorships compared to male authors. The proportion of female authorships exhibits an annual growth of 1.3% overall, with 0.5% for first, 1.2% for co-, and 0.8% for last authorships. Women are underrepresented at prestigious authorship compared to men (Prestige Index=-0.38). The underrepresentation accentuates in highly competitive articles attracting the highest citation rates, namely, articles with many authors and articles that were published in highest-impact journals. Multi-author articles with male key authors are more frequently cited than articles with female key authors. The gender-specific differences in citation rates increase the more authors contribute to an article. Women publish fewer articles compared to men (39.6% female authors are responsible for 35.0% of the authorships) and are underrepresented at productivity levels of more than 1 article per author. Distinct differences at the country level were revealed. Conclusion High impact medical research is characterized by few female group leaders as last authors and many female researchers being first or co-authors early in their career. It is very likely that this gender-specific career dichotomy will persistent in the next decade. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG, Stuttgart.New York.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in high-quality research revealed by nature index journals Open PDF 
    (Public Library of Science, 2018)
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    ;
    Müller, R.
    ;
    Brueggmann, D.
    ;
    Groneberg, D.A.
    Background The present study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-quality research by analyzing the representation of female authorships in the last decade (from 2008 to 2016). Methods Based on the Gendermetrics platform, 293,557 research articles from 54 journals listed in the Nature Index were considered covering the categories Life Science, Multidisciplinary, Earth & Environmental and Chemistry. The core method was the combined analysis of the proportion of female authorships and the female-to-male odds ratio for first, co- and last authorships. The distribution of prestigious authorships was measured by the Prestige Index. Results 29.8% of all authorships and 33.1% of the first, 31.8% of the co- and 18.1% of the last authorships were held by women. The corresponding female-to-male odds ratio is 1.19 (CI: 1.18–1.20) for first, 1.35 (CI: 1.34–1.36) for co- and 0.47 (CI: 0.46–0.48) for last authorships. Women are underrepresented at prestigious authorships compared to men (Prestige Index = -0.42). The underrepresentation accentuates in highly competitive articles attracting the highest citation rates, namely, articles with many authors and articles that were published in highest-impact journals. More specifically, a large negative correlation between the 5-Year-Impact-Factor of a journal and the female representation at prestigious authorships was revealed (r(52) = -.63, P < .001). Women publish fewer articles compared to men (39.0% female authors are responsible for 29.8% of all authorships) and are underrepresented at productivity levels of more than 2 articles per author. Articles with female key authors are less frequently cited than articles with male key authors. The gender-specific differences in citation rates increase the more authors contribute to an article. Distinct differences at the journal, journal category, continent and country level were revealed. The prognosis for the next decades forecast a very slow harmonization of authorships odds between the two genders. © 2018 Bendels et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.