DSpace-CRIS

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Academic medicine’s glass ceiling: Author’s gender in top three medical research journals impacts probability of future publication success Open PDF
(Public Library of Science, 2022)
Krstacic, J.E.
;
Carr, B.M.
;
Yaligar, A.R.
;
Kuruvilla, A.S.
;
Helali, J.S.
Introduction In December 2017, Lancet called for gender inequality investigations. Holding other factors constant, trends over time for significant author (i.e., first, second, last or any of these authors) publications were examined for the three highest-impact medical research journals (i.e., New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], and Lancet). Materials and methods Using randomly sampled 2002-2019 MEDLINE original publications (n = 1,080; 20/year/journal), significant author-based and publication-based characteristics were extracted. Gender assignment used internet-based biographies, pronouns, first names, and photographs. Adjusting for author-specific characteristics and multiple publications per author, generalized estimating equations tested for first, second, and last significant author gender disparities. Results Compared to 37.23% of 2002 – 2019 U.S. medical school full-time faculty that were women, women’s first author publication rates (26.82% overall, 15.83% NEJM, 29.38% Lancet, and 35.39% JAMA; all p < 0.0001) were lower. No improvements over time occurred in women first authorship rates. Women first authors had lower Web of Science citation counts and coauthors/collaborating author counts, less frequently held M.D. or multiple doctoral-level degrees, less commonly published clinical trials or cardiovascular-related projects, but more commonly were North American-based and studied North American-based patients (all p < 0.05). Women second and last authors were similarly underrepresented. Compared to men, women first authors had lower multiple publication rates in these top journals (p < 0.001). Same gender first/last authors resulted in higher multiple publication rates within these top three journals (p < 0.001). Discussion Since 2002, this authorship “gender disparity chasm” has been tolerated across all these top medical research journals. Despite Lancet’s 2017 call to arms, furthermore, the author-based gender disparities have not changed for these top medical research journals - even in recent times. Co-author gender alignment may reduce future gender inequities, but this promising strategy requires further investigation. © 2022 Krstacic 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.
Geographical and gender inequalities in health sciences studies: testing differences in research productivity, impact and visibility Open PDF
(2024)
Goyanes, M.
;
Demeter, M.
;
Háló, G.
;
Arcila-Calderón, C.
;
Gil de Zúñiga, H.
Purpose: Gender and geographical imbalance in production and impact levels is a pressing issue in global knowledge production. Within Health Sciences, while some studies found stark gender and geographical biases and inequalities, others found little empirical evidence of this marginalization. The purpose of the study is to clear the ambiguity concerning the topic. Design/methodology/approach: Based on a comprehensive and systematic analysis of Health Sciences research data downloaded from the Scival (Scopus/Scimago) database from 2017 to 2020 (n = 7,990), this study first compares gender representation in research productivity, as well as differences in terms of citation per document, citations per document view and view per document scores according to geographical location. Additionally, the study clarifies whether there is a geographic bias in productivity and impact measures (i.e. citation per document, citations per document view and view per document) moderated by gender. Findings: Results indicate that gender inequalities in productivity are systematic at the overall disciplinary, as well as the subfield levels. Findings also suggest statistically significant geographical differences in citation per document, citations per document view, and view per document scores, and interaction effect of gender over the relation between geography and (1) the number of citations per view and (2) the number of views per document. Originality/value: This study contributes to scientometric studies in health sciences by providing insightful findings about the geographical and gender bias in productivity and impact across world regions. © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited.
Gender inequalities in authorship of the main Spanish medical journals in 2017 Open PDF
(2020)
Tornero Patricio, S.
;
Alonso Rueda, I.O.
;
García Gozalbes, J.
;
Domínguez Domínguez, J.A.
;
Charris-Castro, L.
Introduction: Some studies have shown a lower female participation in scientific publications. The objective of this study is to analyse the gender inequalities in the main Spanish journals of medical publications. Material and method: Cross-sectional study of the main Spanish medical journals classified by SCImago Journal & Country Ranking (n = 24) and their publications (n = 3.375), during the year 2017. Women/men ratio in authorship was calculated for all journals and types of papers. Bivariate analyses were developed with the type of article as the dependent variable, and gender, institution, and country of the first and last authors as the independent variables. Logistic regression models were performed to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of the types of papers according to authorship gender, institution, and country. The statistical program used was R. Results: The total number of authors was 16,252 (44.2% women, 53.9% men, and 1.9% non-identified gender). Women represented 46% of the first authors and 33.5% of the last ones. Women were the first authors of Editorials less often than men (aOR 0.39; 95% CI 0.30-0.51), but more often in Originals (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.33-1.80). Women were the last authors with less frequency in all types of papers, especially in Editorials (aOR 0.50; 95% CI 0.35-0.70). The women/men ratio in authorship was less than 0.80 in 10 of 26 journals analysed (41.7%). Conclusions: These results show the gender inequalities in the authorship of the main Spanish medical journals in 2017, especially as first authors and Editorials. © 2020

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results