PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.DentistryViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Global

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender analysis of editorial boards and authorship in leading endodontics journals Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2025-01-12)
    Massa, Graziela dos Santos
    ;
    Barbosa, Ana Flávia Almeida
    ;
    Britto, Giovanna Alves
    ;
    Silva, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal
    ;
    Sarkis Onofre, Rafael
    Aim To evaluate the presence of women on editorial boards and as authors in leading global endodontics journals from 2018 to 2023. Methodology The selection of journals was based on the impact factor from Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and CiteScore 2022, with criteria of JCR above 1 and CiteScore above 1.5. Editorial board members were categorized as editor‐in‐chief and associate editor. Authorship was categorized into first, last, and corresponding author roles. The names of editorial board members and authors were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet, and gender analysis was conducted using the platforms Genderize, PubMed, Scopus, ResearchGate, and author's affiliated institutions' websites, categorized in a binary way. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data on the editorial board. A Poisson regression analysis was performed to investigate the prevalence ratio (PR) of female authorship compared with male authorship in the roles of first, last, and corresponding author. The Chi‐square test was performed to evaluate the associations between female authors in prominent positions and the presence of other female authors. Results A total of four journals were analysed, identifying 24 editors‐in‐chief and 233 associate editors. None of the editor‐in‐chief were women, and 23 (9.8%) of the associate editors were female. Amongst the 8965 authors identified, 2983 (33.2%) were female: 1288 (41.1%) were first authors, 827 (27.7%) were last authors and 928 (31.1%) were correspondence authors. The PR for female corresponding authors was higher in AEJ than in JOE (1.07 [CI 1.03–1.11]), whilst the PR for female first authors was lower in IEJ than in JOE (0.96 [CI 0.93–0.99]). There was a lower PR for women as first authors in 2018 (0.94 [CI 0.90–0.99]) and as first (0.94 [CI 0.90–0.98]) and last (0.94 [CI 0.90–0.98)] authors in 2019 compared with 2023. The presence of women in prominent authorship positions was associated with increased female authorship in other positions (p < .01). Conclusion Female participation on editorial boards and as prominent authors in leading journals is low, indicating significant challenges. Increasing female presence in prominent authorship roles may lead to greater female participation in other authorship positions.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender trends in authorship of randomized clinical trials in dentistry Open PDF 
    (FapUNIFESP (SciELO), 2025)
    PRADO, Mayara Colpo
    ;
    DOTTO, Lara
    ;
    AGOSTINI, Bernardo Antônio
    ;
    ONOFRE, Rafael Sarkis
    The aim of the study was to explore female authorship in various aspects of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. A search was performed in PubMed for RCTs, in dentistry, indexed from 12/31/2016 to 12/31/2021. Only studies in English were considered. Data selection and extraction were performed by two authors and the following data collected: year of publication, journal, subject, number and names of authors, and country and gender (Genderize website) of the first 10 authors. Descriptive analyses, graphs, and maps were generated. Poisson regression assessed the influence of continent and year of publication on the presence of women as first or last authors. The results were presented as prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). A total of 844 RCTs and 4,305 authors (2,372 men and 1,662 women) were included. Gender disparity increases as the order of authorship advances. Among first authors, men represent 50.59% and women 44.08%, whereas among last authors, they account for 61.92% and 34.03%, respectively. Analyses showed no association between year of publication and the presence of women as authors. There were fewer women as first authors in Europe (PR: 0.82, 95%CI: 0.68-0.99) and as last authors in Europe and Asia (PR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.53-0.87 and PR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.63-0.99, respectively). The findings highlight a lower presence of female authors in all aspects analyzed in the RCTs, especially in last authorship. Also, there has been no indication of improvement in recent years. Female participation in RCTs is crucial not only for gender equity but also as a means to enhance the quality and relevance of clinical data for decision-making.
  • Item type:Publication,
    National-, institutional-, and individual-level determinants of dental research excellence: an analysis of Stanford–Elsevier lists of the top 2% scholars worldwide (2017–2023) Open PDF 
    (Frontiers Media SA, 2025-10-03)
    Riad, Abanoub
    Background Research excellence, distinct from productivity, is a key criterion in science policy and institutional evaluation. This study examined global distribution and determinants of dental research excellence using the Stanford–Elsevier Lists (SEL) of the top 2% most-cited scientists. Methods A bibliometric analysis was conducted using SEL datasets from 2017 to 2023. The analysis followed an ecological model consisting of three layers of independent variables: national-level indicators (macroeconomic metrics, oral disease burden, and development indices), institutional rankings, and individual-level variables (gender and academic age) were analysed. Descriptive statistics, multivariable regressions, and mixed-effects models were applied. Results The analysis demonstrated a markedly uneven global distribution of excellent dental scholars (EDS), with 96.1% and 88.9% of career-long and single-year EDS, respectively, based in high-income countries. English-speaking countries dominated, reflecting historical and linguistic biases. Institutional elitism was apparent, with 20 universities accounting for nearly one-fifth of all EDS worldwide. Gender disparities persisted, with women comprising only 14.8% (career-long) and 18.1% (single-year). Academic age consistently predicted scholarly metrics more strongly than gender. EDS numbers correlated positively with macroeconomic indicators, particularly R&amp;D investment, while oral disease burden was negatively correlated. Conclusions Dental research excellence is disproportionately concentrated in high-income, English-speaking countries and elite institutions. Historic gender disparities remain, though narrowing trends are noticeable. The observed misalignment between oral disease burden and research excellence highlights the need for inclusive, needs-based research investment.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Persistent gender disparity in leading dental publications across 4 decades: an observational study Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Moreno, Laura Barreto
    ;
    Franco, Marina Christ
    ;
    Karam, Sarah Arangurem
    ;
    van de Sande, Françoise Hélène
    ;
    Montagner, Anelise Fernandes
    OBJECTIVES: This observational study assessed the differences in the gender of the first and last authors in the most-cited dental articles over the last 4 decades. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Articles were obtained through an electronic search of the most-cited articles in dentistry by decade (total n = 400 articles). The 100 most-cited studies in each decade (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019), with any study design, with results in dentistry were eligible. The gender of the first and last authors was determined using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution in general and across the 4 decades was performed with the Chi-square test, and the contribution of variables on the citation rate of articles was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: There were statistical differences between the gender distributions, with a predominance of men in the first (83.8%) and the last (86.8%) positions (P < .001). Over the decades, there was a tendency for an increase in the proportion of women as the last author (P = .002; Chi-square trend Test), with an increase of women from 6% to 22% across the last 4 decades. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the genders for the first author in the last 4 decades (P = .163; Chi-square trend Test). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that men lead a large percentage of the most-cited articles in dentistry and that this trend has not shown substantial modifications over the last years. Nonetheless, for the position of last authorship, an increase in women's representativity was observed over the last decades.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Author self-citation in orthodontics is associated with author origin and gender Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Livas, C.
    ;
    Delli, K.
    ;
    Pandis, N.
    Background: The aims of this bibliometric study were to determine author self-citation trends in high-impact orthodontic literature and to investigate possible association between self-citation and publication characteristics. Methods: Six orthodontic journals with the highest impact factor as ranked by 2017 Journal Citation Reports were screened for a full publication year (2018) for original research articles, reviews, and case reports. Eligible articles were scrutinized for article and author characteristics and citation metrics. Univariable and multivariable negative binomial regression was used to examine associations between self-citation incidence and publication characteristics. Results: Medians for author self-citation rate of the most self-citing authors and self-citations were 3.03% (range 0–50) and 1 (range 0–19), respectively. In the univariable analysis, there was no association between self-citation counts and study type (P = 0.41), article topic (P = 0.61), number of authors (P = 0.62), and rank of authors (P = 0.56). Author origin (P = 0.001), gender (P = 0.001) and journal (P = 0.05) were associated with self-citation counts and in the multivariable analysis only origin and gender remained strong self-citation predictors. Asian authors and females self-cited significantly less often than all other regions and male authors. Conclusions: Authors in orthodontics do not self-cite at a frequency that suggests potential citation manipulation. Author origin and gender were the only variables associated with citations counts. More bibliometric research is necessary to draw solid conclusions about author self-citation trends in orthodontic literature. © 2021, The Author(s).