PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.CardiologyGeographical Area: search.filters.geographical.Europe

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities in authorship in European cardio-thoracic journals Open PDF 
    (Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025-06-19)
    Galeone, Antonella
    ;
    Cleuziou, Julie
    ;
    Perrone, Fabiola
    ;
    Maffei, Irene
    ;
    Fiorinelli, Giorgia
    OBJECTIVES The goal was to evaluate gender authorship in 2 cardio-thoracic surgical journals. METHODS We performed a bibliometric analysis of all articles published from 2017 to 2022 in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Interdisciplinary Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. For each article, the gender and academic rank of the first, senior and corresponding authors were verified by Internet search, email contact or use of the application Genderize.io. Articles were categorized based on topic, type and country of origin. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to evaluate gender authorship trend over time. RESULTS A total of 5243 articles were included in the analysis. Women represented 18% of first authors, 7% of senior authors and 13% of corresponding authors; no trend was seen over time. Women represented 16% of first authors and 7% of senior authors in adult cardiac surgery, 23% of first authors and 9% of senior authors in congenital cardiac surgery and 19% of first authors and 8% of senior authors in thoracic surgery. Male first authors were more frequently full professors (17% vs 5%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%), and male senior authors were more frequently full professors (48% vs 31%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%) compared to female senior authors. CONCLUSIONS The proportion of female authors is significantly lower than that of male authors in highest-impact European cardio-thoracic surgery journals, and no significant increase in female authorship has been demonstrated in recent years. Increasing awareness of gender disparities is essential to facilitate equal career opportunities and academic advancement for women in cardio-thoracic surgery.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex Disparities in Authorship Order of Cardiology Scientific Publications Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Ouyang, David
    ;
    Sing, David
    ;
    Shah, Sonia
    ;
    Hu, Jiaqi
    ;
    Duvernoy, Claire
    BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the representation of women in medical training, women continue to be underrepresented in cardiology, academic medicine, and more specifically, in senior positions within academic medicine. Identifying disparities in research productivity and acknowledgment can highlight barriers to female representation in academic cardiology leadership, as well as in academic promotion. METHODS AND RESULTS: This bibliometric analysis included all authors of original research articles between 1980 and 2017 from 3 high-impact cardiology journals ( Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, and European Heart Journal). We identified 71 345 unique authors of 55 085 primary research articles during our study period. Female authors accounted for 33.1% of all authors; however, they represented only 26.7% of first authors and 19.7% of senior authors. Looking at the most prolific authors within this time period, female authors were not well represented, accounting for only 5% of the top 100 authors. Articles with a female senior author had more female middle authors than articles with a male senior author (mean 1.41 versus 0.97, P<0.001) and were more likely to have a female first author (0.37 versus 0.18, P<0.001). There was an increased representation of female authors as first and senior authors compared with the total number of articles with female authors over time ( P<0.001 for trend); however, female senior authorship rates continued to lag first authorship rates. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large database of published manuscripts, we found that female representation in published cardiology research has increased over the past 4 decades. However, women continue to be not well represented as first authors, senior authors, and in the number of publications. When women were senior authors, they published more articles with female first authors and had more female authors. In addition to recruiting more women into the field of cardiology, additional work is needed to identify and address barriers to academic advancement for female physician-scientists.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Is there a gender gap in Portuguese cardiology research? A review of data from the Portuguese Journal of Cardiology Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Timóteo, A.T.
    A gender gap is apparent in several professional areas, including in medicine and particularly in the cardiovascular field. We present a brief review of the topic and we analyze data from the Portuguese Journal of Cardiology regarding female authorship. © 2020
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Composition and Trends of Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia Editorial Board Membership: A 33-Year Analysis, 1987-2019 Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Pagel, Paul S.
    ;
    Freed, Julie K.
    ;
    Lien, Cynthia A.
    OBJECTIVE: Gender disparities in editorial board composition exist in the vast majority of specialties including anesthesiology. If a similar lack of gender parity exists in cardiothoracic anesthesiology is unknown. The authors examined the gender composition and trends of the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (JCVA) editorial board from the initial year of its publication (1987) to 2019. The authors tested the hypothesis that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history, but women are underrepresented compared with the percentage of those currently practicing academic cardiothoracic anesthesia in the United States (US). DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Internet analysis. PARTICIPANTS: All members of the JCVA editorial board, 1987-2019. INTERVENTIONS: The JCVA editor-in-chief, the associate editor-in-chief, associate editors, section editors, and general editors on the board were extracted from the masthead of a single issue from each calendar year. The years were divided into quartiles (1987-1995, 1996-2003, 2004-2011, and 2012-2019) to collect representative samples of editorial board composition for analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 2,797 members of the JCVA editorial board were positively identified (2,477 [88.6%] men; 310 [11.1%] women); 10 (0.3%) editors could not be identified. Four hundred and fourteen associate and section editors were recorded (men 360 [87.0%], women 54 [13.0%]). There were also 2,353 general editors (2,087 [88.7%] men; 256 [10.9%] women). The total number of JCVA board members, associate and section editors, and general editors progressively increased from 1987 to 1995 to 2012 to 2019. The percentage of women serving on the editorial board increased from 2.5% to 15.8%. Increases in the proportion of female general editors from 2.9% to 16.2% were responsible for this overall increase. A gender gap between the percentage of female first authors (data obtained from a previous publication) and editorial board members was observed in each quartile. Editorial board composition was also different than last author distribution in 1987 to 1995 and 2012 to 2019, but not the other 2 time periods. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history. Nevertheless, women continue to be underrepresented on the JCVA board compared with the percentage of US female academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists, and gender gaps between first and last authorship and board composition also persist.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender equity in medical publications: Nurses have smashed the glass ceiling Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Feral-Pierssens, A.-L.
    ;
    Avondo, A.
    ;
    Stefano, C.D.
    ;
    Deltour, S.
    ;
    Lapostolle, F.
    Introduction Gender equity has become a major concern in many professional fields. The rate of women as authors has to be interpreted according to the rate of women in the related professions. In this perspective, studying nurses' population should be of particular interest since, worldwide, nurses are mostly women. Then, our aim was to study gender disparity in nurses' publications. Methods We selected the three main journals dedicated to nurse publications: International Journal of Nursing Studies, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, and European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. We included 20 recent consecutive papers from each journal. For each paper, the number of authors, their gender, and rank were recorded. Primary endpoint: Overall rate of women as authors. Secondary endpoints: Rate of women as first, last, second, and third authors. Results Sixty papers including 322 authors were analysed. Overall rate of women authors: 74%. Overall rate of women as first author: 82%. Overall rate of women as last author: 72%. Overall rate of women as second and third authors: Respectively, 80% and 70%. Conclusion Almost three-quarters of the authors in these main scientific journals of nursing studies were female. This rate is lower than the gender rate in the nursing profession. © 2021 SAGE Publications Inc.. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender gap in articles published in European Radiology and CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology: evolution between 2002 and 2016 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Bernard, Chloé
    ;
    Pommier, Romain
    ;
    Vilgrain, Valérie
    ;
    Ronot, Maxime
    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate gender differences in the authorship of articles published in two major European radiology journals, European Radiology (EurRad) and CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR). METHODS: A retrospective bibliometric analysis was performed of 2632 papers published in EurRad and CVIR sampled over a period of 14 years (2002-2016). The authors' gender was determined. The analysis was focused on first and last authors. In addition, the characteristics of the articles (type, origin, radiological subspecialty, and country) were noted. RESULTS: Overall, 23% of first authors and 10% of the last authors were women. The proportion of women significantly increased over time in EurRad from 22% in 2002 to 35% in 2016 for first authors (p > 0.001), and from 13% in 2002 to 18% in 2016 for last authors (p = 0.05). There was no significant increase in the proportion of female authors in CVIR over time. Female authors were more frequently identified in breast imaging (48%), pediatrics, and gynecological imaging (29%). There were more female authors in articles from Spain (34%), the Netherlands (28%), France, Italy, and South Korea (26%). Forty-one percent and 21% of women were first authors with a woman or man as last author, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was a significant increase in female authorship in original diagnostic but not interventional imaging research articles between 2002 and 2016, with a strong influence of the radiological subspecialty. Women were significantly more frequently first authors when the last author was a woman. KEY POINTS: • There was a significant increase in female authorship in original diagnostic but not interventional imaging research articles between 2002 and 2016. • There is a strong influence of the radiological subspecialty on the percentage of female authors. • Women are significantly more frequently first authors when the last author is a woman.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The Persistence of Sex Bias in High-Impact Clinical Research Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Barlek, Mark H.
    ;
    Rouan, Jessica R.
    ;
    Wyatt, Thomas G.
    ;
    Helenowski, Irene
    ;
    Kibbe, Melina R.
    INTRODUCTION: Sex bias is present in clinical research resulting in disparities in the treatment of women. Our objective was to identify the prevalence of sex inclusiveness of participants in human clinical trials after the passage of National Institutes of Health (NIH) and United States Congress policies in 2015 and 2016 to increase female enrollment in clinical research. METHODS: We performed an observational analysis of data from registered clinical trials published in three high-impact biomedical journals from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred and forty two manuscripts with 4,765,783 human subjects were included for analysis. Significantly more males (56%) than females (44%) were included in all three journals (P < 0.0001). Sex matching ≥ 80% was found in 24.6% of publications. Industry funded 43.7% of all studies enrolling significantly more males than females (60.8% versus 39.2%, P < 0.0001). NIH funded 10.2% of studies enrolling significantly more females than males (52.7% versus 47.3%, P < 0.0001). North America and Europe contributed 82.6% of the studies with each enrolling significantly more males than females (P < 0.0001). The United States was the country contributing the most studies (36.1%), enrolling significantly more males than females (55.5% versus 45.5%, P < 0.0001). Cardiovascular disease was the subject area of the most manuscripts among medical specialties (19%), enrolling significantly more males than females (64.9% versus 35.1%, P < 0.0001). Studies analyzed by clinical trial phase, type, trial, and allocation enrolled significantly more males than females (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Sex bias remains prevalent in human clinical research trials. Improvements have been made in NIH-funded clinical trials; however, this constitutes a small percentage of overall studies.