PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Groneberg, D.A.

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in Authorships of Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia Research Articles Open PDF 
    (IOS Press, 2019)
    Menzel, L.C.
    ;
    Kramer, P.W.
    ;
    Groneberg, D.A.
    ;
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    Background: Alzheimer's disease and dementia are an increasing burden affecting more than 50 million patients worldwide. Hence, research has increased significantly in recent decades. It is recognized that female authors are systematically underrepresented in research in general. Objective: In this article, we examine gender disparities in academic research on dementia and Alzheimer's disease in the last decade. Methods: 104,858 male and female authorships from 37,961 original research articles were analyzed. The global and country-specific distribution of women across first, co, and last authorships was determined with the inclusion of a citation and productivity analysis. Results: 42.1% of all authorships and 50.2% of the first, 42.2% of the co, and 32.8% of the last authorships were held by women. Women were less commonly cited, published fewer articles and were also less likely to secure prestigious authorships in articles with multiple authors compared with men. Distinct differences were observed among the countries. Conclusion: Substantial growth in the number of prestigious female authorships has been observed to date and is predicted to continue in the future, with an emphasis on the progressive representation of women and a diminishing gender gap. © 2019 - IOS Press and the authors.
  • 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,
    World-wide architecture of osteoporosis research: density-equalizing mapping studies and gender analysis Open PDF 
    (2016)
    Brüggmann, D.
    ;
    Mäule, L.-S.
    ;
    Klingelhöfer, D.
    ;
    Schöffel, N.
    ;
    Gerber, A.
    Objective: While research activities on osteoporosis grow constantly, no concise description of the global research architecture exists. Hence, we aim to analyze and depict the world-wide scientific output on osteoporosis combining bibliometric tools, density-equalizing mapping projections and gender analysis. Method: Using the NewQIS platform, we analyzed all osteoporosis-related publications authored from 1900 to 2012 and indexed by the Web of Science. Bibliometric details were analyzed related to quantitative and semi-qualitative aspects. Results: The majority of 57 453 identified publications were original research articles. The USA and Western Europe dominated the field regarding cooperation activity, publication and citation performance. Asia, Africa and South America played a minimal role. Gender analysis revealed a dominance of male scientists in almost all countries except Brazil. Conclusion: Although the scientific performance on osteoporosis is increasing world-wide, a significant disparity in terms of research output was visible between developed and low-income countries. This finding is particularly concerning since epidemiologic evaluations of future osteoporosis prevalences predict enormous challenges for the health-care systems in low-resource countries. Hence, our study underscores the need to address these disparities by fostering future research endeavors in these nations with the aim to successfully prevent a growing global burden related to osteoporosis. © 2016 International Menopause Society.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in pediatric research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Böhme, K.
    ;
    Klingelhöfer, D.
    ;
    Groneberg, D.A.
    ;
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    Background: The proportion of women in medicine, especially in pediatrics, is noticeably increasing. Yet, leadership positions are predominantly occupied by men. Methods: Academic authorships of 156,642 pediatric original research articles were analyzed with regard to gender disparities. The evaluation included the proportion of female authorships (FAP), distributions over first-, co- and last-authorships, gender-related citation rates, a productivity analysis and investigations on journals, countries and pediatric sub-disciplines. Results: In all, 46.6% of all authorships in pediatric research were held by female authors. Women held relatively more first-authorships (FAP = 52%) and had higher odds for first- (OR = 1.3) and co- (OR = 1.11) authorships, compared to men. The Prestige Index of −0.13 indicated an underrepresentation of female authors at prestigious first- and last-authorships. Citation rates were not affected by the gender of the key authors. At the country-level pronounced gender-related differences were detected. The time trend showed increasing female prospects forecasting a female-dominated Prestige Index of 0.05 in 2023. Conclusion: The integration of women in pediatric research has advanced. Opportunities for female authors differ at the country-level, but overall women are lacking in leadership positions. Improving career opportunities for women in pediatric research can be expected in the coming years. Impact: There is a measurable progress in the integration of female scientists.Gender-neutrality is partially achieved in pediatric research with yet a female underrepresentation in leading positions.Our descriptive study presents gender-related dynamics in pediatric research that forecast improving career opportunities for female scientists. © 2022, The Author(s).
  • 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 equality in academic research on epilepsy—a study on scientific authorships Open PDF 
    (2017)
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    ;
    Wanke, E.
    ;
    Schöffel, N.
    ;
    Bauer, J.
    ;
    Quarcoo, D.
    Objective: The study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in epilepsy research, analyzing the representation of female authorships from 2008 to 2016. Methods: Gendermetrics aided in analyzing 106,282 authorships from 22,180 epilepsy-related original research articles. The key methodology was the combined analysis of the relative frequency and the odds ratio of female authorships. The Prestige Index measures the distribution of prestigious authorships between the two genders. Results: The following were held by women: 39.6% of all authorships and 44.1% of the first, 41.0% of the co-, and 29.0% of the last authorships. Female authors have an odds ratio of 1.25 (95% CI 1.21–1.29) for first, 1.17 (CI 1.14–1.20) for co-, and 0.57 (CI 0.55–0.59) for last authorships. The female authorship ratios showed substantial growth in recent years, with an annual growth rate of 1.7% overall, with 2.4% for first, 1.4% for co-, and 1.9% for last authorships. Women publish fewer articles compared to men (43.8% female authors hold 39.6% of the authorships). Women are also less likely to secure prestigious authorships in articles with many authors that attract the highest citation rates. Multi-author articles with male key authors are cited slightly more frequently than articles with female key authors. Distinct differences at the country level were revealed. The prognosis for the next decade forecasts significantly increasing female odds for first authorships and only slightly higher female odds for last authorships. A female authorship ratio of 49.2% is predicted for the year 2026. Significance: The integration of women in the scientific field of epilepsy is advanced. However, a dichotomy is present: Although the current system promotes early career steps, there is an apparent lack of female research leaders. This structural imbalance is expected to grow in the next decade due to the consistently high increase of female early career researchers. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2017 International League Against Epilepsy
  • 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.