PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.CardiologySubject: search.filters.subject.Cardiology

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10
  • 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,
    Ending Gender Inequality in Cardiovascular Clinical Trial Leadership: JACC Review Topic of the Week Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Van Spall, Harriette G. C.
    ;
    Lala, Anuradha
    ;
    Deering, Thomas F.
    ;
    Casadei, Barbara
    ;
    Zannad, Faiez
    Women are under-represented as leaders of cardiovascular randomized controlled trials, representing 1 in 10 lead authors of cardiovascular trials published in high-impact journals. Although the proportion of cardiovascular specialists who are women has increased in recent years, the proportion of cardiovascular clinical trialists who are women has not. This gap, underpinned by systemic sexism, has not been adequately addressed. The benefits of diverse randomized controlled trial leadership extend to patients and professionals. In this position statement, we present strategies adopted by some organizations to end gender inequality in research leadership. We offer an actionable roadmap for early-career researchers, scientists, academic institutions, professional societies, trial sponsors, and journals to follow, with the goal of harnessing the strength of women and under-represented groups as research leaders and facilitating a just culture in the cardiovascular clinical trial enterprise.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in Cardiology-Related COVID-19 Publications Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Vasti, Elena C.
    ;
    Ouyang, David
    ;
    Ngo, Summer
    ;
    Sarraju, Ashish
    ;
    Harrington, Robert A.
    INTRODUCTION: Female authors are underrepresented in cardiology journals, although prior work suggested improvement in reducing disparities over time. Early in the recent COVID-19 pandemic, female authorship continued to lag that of their male counterparts despite a surge in publications. The cumulative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on authorship gender disparities remains unclear. We aimed to characterize gender disparities in COVID-19-related cardiology publications across the duration of the ongoing pandemic. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19-related research articles published in the top 20 impact factor cardiology journals between March and June 2021. Gender representation data were extracted for any author, first authors, and senior authors. RESULTS: We found that 841 articles were related to COVID-19, with a total of 5586 authors and an average of 42 articles per journal. Less than a third (29.9%) of the total authors from publications were women. Women represented a smaller proportion of first authors (21.3%) and senior authors (16.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Female authorship has continued to lag male authorship for the duration of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic may have impeded progress in reducing gender disparities in academic cardiology publications. The low proportions of first and senior female authors may reflect the impact of the pandemic on women in cardiology in leadership domains.
  • 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 Parity in High Impact Cardiology Journals Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Petrechko, Oksana
    ;
    Faturos, Andrew S.
    ;
    Pal, Suman
    ;
    Khan, Umair
    ;
    Majeed, Harris
    Despite increased female representation in medical training, women physicians continue to be under-represented in academic cardiology, particularly in senior roles of authorship and leadership. We analyzed the top 20 most-cited cardiology journals (31,540 total articles) between January 1, 2018 and October 31, 2021 for gender distribution of editorial staff and authorship. Our data demonstrated that only 27% of articles had women as first authors and 20% as senior authors. Women constituted 23% of editorial staff. There is a statistically significant negative correlation (R = 0.67, P = 0.0011) between the percentage of women as first authors and the percentage of men on editorial boards. Overall, female authorship increased from 26% first and 19% senior authors in 2018, to 29% first and 22% senior authors in 2021. Women authors are significantly under-represented in academic cardiology publications, and additional work is needed to identify and address barriers to publishing and academic advancement for women in cardiology.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Geographic Mapping of Gender Disparities in Authorship of Cardiovascular Literature Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Goel, Ridhima
    ;
    Sartori, Samantha
    ;
    Vogel, Birgit
    ;
    Okoli, Kimberly
    ;
    Franklin-Bedel, Kayla
    BACKGROUND: Women in cardiology experience considerable gender disparities in publications, which hinders their career advancements to higher faculty and senior leadership positions. However, the extent of these disparities across different types of cardiovascular literature is not well understood. OBJECTIVES: We investigated gender differences in authorship across various cardiovascular publications over a decade and examined geographic variations in the representation of women authors. METHODS: All papers published from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, in 4 major cardiovascular journals (Journal of the American College of Cardiology, European Heart Journal, Journal of the American Medical Association Cardiology, and Nature Reviews Cardiology) were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 18,535 papers with 111,562 authors, 20.6% of the authors were women, and 47.7% of the papers had no women authors. Over 10 years, the proportion of women authors remained low (20.7% in 2010 to 21.4% in 2019), with the lowest proportion in editorial papers (14.8%) and the highest in research papers (21.8%). More women as first (34.6%) and last (47.6%) authors were affiliated with institutions in the United States compared with other countries. The proportion of women middle-order authors was higher on papers with women as first authors (29.4% vs 20.5%) or last authors (30.6% vs 21.3%), compared with papers with men as first or last authors, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past decade, the proportion of women authors across all article types in major cardiovascular journals remained low. A call to action is needed to promote women in cardiology and provide them with equitable opportunities.
  • 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 Equity Imbalance in Cardiology Scientific Sessions in the Americas Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Burgos, Lucrecia María
    ;
    Farina, Juan
    ;
    Sauce Perez, Ana Laura
    ;
    Ortiz Lopez, Hector Isaac Alejando
    ;
    Gupta, Shyla Devi
    Women remain largely under-represented in cardiology worldwide. This is especially reflected in scientific sessions where panelists have a male preponderant representation. The amount of gender equity in cardiology during scientific activities in the American continent is unknown. The objective was to compare gender distribution of invited panelists in cardiology scientific sessions across the Americas during the period 2019-2020. A retrospective analysis of the cardiology scientific sessions held in North, Central, and South America was conducted. Sessions published on the official site and social networks of the national cardiology societies from January 1, 2019 to August 10, 2020 were included. Gender distribution and all-male panels were compared according to geographic regions, year, roles in the panel, and the main topics of the session. Seven hundred fifty-two scientific sessions were analyzed, with 3786 participants. The median participation of women was 20% (IQR 0%-37.5%). Specifically, the statistics reflected a female participation of 25% (IQR 0%-43.6%) in North America, 12.5% (IQR 0%-43%) in Central America and 10% (IQR 0%-33.3%) in South America (P < 0.0001). Women participation in the panels was different according to the main topic of the session (P < 0.0001), with higher proportions in topics such as cardiovascular diseases in women, congenital heart disease and cardio oncology. The frequency of all-male panels was 36.8% (CI95% 33.3-40.1), and it increased over time (2019: 30.9% vs 2020: 40.3%; P = 0.012). There is gender inequity in cardiology scientific sessions held in different regions of the Americas, with low participation of women especially in interventionist panels and leadership roles.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Publication performance of women compared to men in German cardiology Open PDF 
    (2015)
    Böhm, M.
    ;
    Papoutsis, K.
    ;
    Gottwik, M.
    ;
    Ukena, C.
    Background presentations at scientific congresses are a preparation for publication in peer reviewed journals. The present study aimed to investigate the prediction of abstract acceptance of peer reviewed publications focusing on the difference between male and female first authors. Methods We evaluated 8411 abstracts submitted to the German Cardiac Society by 2090 females and 6321 male scientists. Abstract grading (3 to 9 reviewers, blinded on a 5-point scale) separated those accepted and rejected followed by a bibliometric analysis of Medline publications from 2006 to 2012. Results While rating of abstracts was not different between males and females (p = 0.475), publication rate of females was lower compared to males (17.5% vs 24.4 ≥ %, p < 0.001). Female authors achieved a higher impact factor in their publications (5.1 ± 0.2 vs 4.4 ± 0.1, p = 0.0003) and were more often listed on papers in highly ranked journals (impact factor ≥ 5) than males. Although, more accepted abstracts than rejected ones were published in high rank journals, a considerable number of papers were generated from rejected abstracts (22%). Conclusions Female cardiologists had a better publication success than males concerning high rank peer reviewed publications. Acceptance in blinded abstract evaluation often detects work published later, while rejected contributions still might represent high quality work suitable for publication in peer reviewed journals. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex Differences in Authorship of Academic Cardiology Literature Over the Last 2 Decades. Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Asghar, Mariam
    ;
    Usman, Muhammad Shariq
    ;
    Aibani, Rafi
    ;
    Ansari, Hamza Tahir
    ;
    Siddiqi, Tariq Jamal