PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
6 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Sex Disparities in Authorship Order of Cardiology Scientific Publications Open PDF(2018) ;Ouyang, David ;Sing, David ;Shah, Sonia ;Hu, JiaqiDuvernoy, ClaireBACKGROUND: 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, Unequal opportunities in Italian cardiovascular research: focus on gender Open PDF(2022) ;Massaro, G. ;Matteucci, A. ;Bonanni, M. ;Testa, A.Frati, G.BACKGROUND: Despite unanimous calls for more equitable access and support to female researchers, there are persistent barriers to women's career progression and professional fulfillment. These discriminative hurdles undermine female gender in science and have detrimental effects on research activities and female professionals and patients. There is no data on women's outlook in cardiovascular research in Italy, which limits appropriate remedial actions. We aimed at providing an updated perspective on top Italian cardiovascular researchers, focusing on women versus men comparisons. METHODS: Top Italian cardiovascular researchers were retrieved from a dedicated and validated Scopus query. Researchers' sex was assigned according to the given name with a consensus process. Several metrics were compared, including global rank, total cites, total cites adjusted by academic age, H-index, and self-citation percentage. Bivariate and propensity score-adjusted analyses were used for inferential purposes. RESULTS: Our analysis shows the existence of a gender gap: the number of scientific articles published by Italian male researchers in their careers is significantly higher than their female counterparts (P=0.002). For men, the year of first publication is earlier (P=0.001); they also published more articles as a single author, or single + first author or single + first + last author. Men's papers cited at least once were more than those of women (P≤0.001), and the total number of citations was significantly higher for men (P=0.002). These results remain significant both in the analysis excluding self-citations as well as in the analysis including self-citations. The single-year analysis (2019) confirms the significance of the career analysis, adding that men have a higher rank based on composite score (P=0.041, or P=0.005 if including self-citation). Finally, men have a higher percentage of self-citation in 2019 than women (P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The gender disparity is still a limiting factor in Italian cardiovascular research. Despite career advancement, women continue to be underrepresented. Men retain more leadership positions in academia and maintain the edge for scientific work productions. More efforts are needed to ensure equity between men and women. © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA.Item type:Publication, Characteristics of Heart Failure Trials Associated With Under-Representation of Women as Lead Authors Open PDF(2020) ;Whitelaw, Sera ;Thabane, Lehana ;Mamas, Mamas A. ;Reza, NosheenBreathett, KhadijahBACKGROUND: Clinical trials change practice in cardiology, and leading them requires research training, mentorship, sponsorship, and networking. Women report challenges in obtaining these opportunities. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to evaluate temporal trends in representation of women as authors in heart failure (HF) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in high-impact medical journals and explore RCT characteristics associated with women as lead authors. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for HF RCTs published in journals with an impact factor ≥10 between January 1, 2000, and May 7, 2019. We assessed temporal trends in the gender distribution of authors, and used multivariable logistic regression to determine characteristics associated with women as lead authors. RESULTS: We identified 10,596 unique articles, of which 403 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Women represented 15.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.2% to 19.6%), 12.9% (95% CI: 9.8% to 16.6%), and 11.4% (95% CI: 8.5% to 14.9%) of lead, senior, and corresponding authors, respectively. The proportion of women authors has not changed over time. Women had lower odds of lead authorship in RCTs that were multicenter (odds ratio [OR]: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.96; p = 0.037), were coordinated in North America (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.70; p = 0.011) or Europe (OR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.91; p = 0.039), tested drug interventions (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.97; p = 0.043), or had men as the senior author (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.93; p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Women are under-represented as authors of HF RCTs, with no change in temporal trends. Women had lower odds of lead authorship in RCTs that were multicenter, were coordinated in North America or Europe, tested drug interventions, or had men as senior authors.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 Differences in Publication Authorship During COVID-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of High-Impact Cardiology Journals Open PDF(2021) ;DeFilippis, Ersilia M. ;Sinnenberg, Lauren ;Mahmud, Nadim ;Wood, Malissa J.Hayes, Sharonne N.Background The purpose of this study was to examine gender differences in authorship of manuscripts in select high-impact cardiology journals during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods and Results All manuscripts published between March 1, 2019 to June 1, 2019 and March 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 in 4 high-impact cardiology journals (Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, JAMA Cardiology, and European Heart Journal) were identified using bibliometric data. Authors' genders were determined by matching first name with predicted gender using a validated multinational database (Genderize.io) and manual adjudication. Proportions of women and men first, co-first, senior, and co-senior authors, manuscript types, and whether the manuscript was COVID-19 related were recorded. In 2019, women were first authors of 176 (22.3%) manuscripts and senior authors of 99 (15.0%) manuscripts. In 2020, women first authored 230 (27.4%) manuscripts and senior authored 138 (19.3%) manuscripts. Proportions of woman first and senior authors were significantly higher in 2020 compared with 2019. Women were more likely to be first authors if the manuscript's senior author was a woman (33.8% for woman first/woman senior versus 23.4% for woman first/man senior; P<0.001). Women were less likely to be first authors of COVID-19-related original research manuscripts (P=0.04). Conclusions Representation of women as key authors of manuscripts published in major cardiovascular journals increased during the early COVID-19 pandemic compared with similar months in 2019. However, women were significantly less likely to be first authors of COVID-19-related original research manuscripts. Future investigation into the gender-disparate impacts of COVID-19 on academic careers is critical.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, ValérieRonot, MaximeOBJECTIVES: 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.