PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.NeurologySubject: search.filters.subject.Authorship

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in Authorships of Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia Research Articles Open PDF 
    (IOS Press, 2019)
    Menzel, L.C.
    ;
    Kramer, P.W.
    ;
    Groneberg, D.A.
    ;
    Bendels, M.H.K.
    Background: Alzheimer's disease and dementia are an increasing burden affecting more than 50 million patients worldwide. Hence, research has increased significantly in recent decades. It is recognized that female authors are systematically underrepresented in research in general. Objective: In this article, we examine gender disparities in academic research on dementia and Alzheimer's disease in the last decade. Methods: 104,858 male and female authorships from 37,961 original research articles were analyzed. The global and country-specific distribution of women across first, co, and last authorships was determined with the inclusion of a citation and productivity analysis. Results: 42.1% of all authorships and 50.2% of the first, 42.2% of the co, and 32.8% of the last authorships were held by women. Women were less commonly cited, published fewer articles and were also less likely to secure prestigious authorships in articles with multiple authors compared with men. Distinct differences were observed among the countries. Conclusion: Substantial growth in the number of prestigious female authorships has been observed to date and is predicted to continue in the future, with an emphasis on the progressive representation of women and a diminishing gender gap. © 2019 - IOS Press and the authors.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women Representation as First and Corresponding Authors in Neuroanesthesiology and Neurocritical Care Journals: A Retrospective Analysis Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Gupta, Nidhi
    ;
    Banerjee, Shraya
    ;
    Choudhury, Kalyanpury J.
    ;
    Prabhakar, Hemanshu
    INTRODUCTION: There is limited literature on the representation of women in leading roles in neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care academia. We aimed to determine the representation of women as first and corresponding authors in articles published in 3 dedicated journals of neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care during last 5 years. METHODS: Articles published in the Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology, Neurocritical Care, and Journal of Neuroanaesthesiology and Critical Care between July 1, 2015 and June 30, 2020 were included in this study. The primary outcome was the proportion of women first authors, and secondary outcomes were the percentage of women corresponding authors, and representation of women as first and corresponding author by article type and country of affiliation. RESULTS: Of the 1164 articles included in the study, 403 (34.6%) had a woman first author. Women first authorship was highest for Special Articles (5/11; 45.5%), Clinical Reports (44/113; 38.9%) and Narrative Review Articles (58/151; 38.4%) and lowest for Original Research Articles (198/597; 33.2%). Women accounted for 29.6% (344/1164) of corresponding authors across all article types. Overall, the United States and India had the highest representation of women first authors (159/403; 39.0% and 107/344; 31.0%, respectively), and India also had highest proportion of women corresponding authors (107/272; 39.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Women were underrepresented compared with men as first author of articles published in 3 dedicated neuroanesthesiology and neurocritical care journals over the last 5 years. Women had the lowest representation as authors of Original Research Articles.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research. Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Thomson, Alison
    ;
    Horne, Rachel
    ;
    Chung, Christine
    ;
    Marta, Monica
    ;
    Giovannoni, Gavin
    OBJECTIVE: To establish the gender distribution of multiple sclerosis (MS) researchers across high-impact neurologic publications, MS-specific journals, and the European Committee for Treatment and Research in MS (ECTRIMS). METHODS: Journal editorial boards and contents were retrieved online to assess first-named and senior authors. Published tables of contents for each journal from 2017 were reviewed. Congrex, the ECTRIMS organizers, were contacted and speaker names were obtained from online abstracts to assess visible opinion leaders. RESULTS: A total of 2,080 articles were analyzed across 4 general neurology journals, and 452 across 2 MS journals. Overall, 36% of general neurology articles had a female first name author and 25% had a female senior author. In MS-specific journals, 44% of first authors and 35% of senior authors were female, with similar proportions of unique authors. There is limited female representation on the ECTRIMS executive board, but reasonable balance on Council. Almost 50% of attendees in 2017 were female, but only 35% of invited speakers. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial female drop-off between junior and senior research level across multiple areas. Strategies to support gender balance are urgently required, including developing mentorship schemes, ensuring gender balance in conferences, and thorough examination of the barriers facing female academics with direct challenges to address unconscious bias.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Increases in female academic productivity and female mentorship highlight sustained progress in previously identified neurosurgical gender disparities Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Taha, Birra
    ;
    Sadda, Praneeth
    ;
    Winston, Graham
    ;
    Odigie, Eseosa
    ;
    Londono, Cristina
    OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was performed to understand disparities in the representation of female authorship within the neurosurgical literature and implications for career advancement of women in neurosurgery. METHODS: Author names for articles published in 16 of the top neurosurgical journals from 2002 to 2019 were obtained from MEDLINE. The gender of each author was determined using automated prediction methods. Publication trends were compared over time and across subdisciplines. Female authorship was also compared to the proportionate composition of women in the field over time. RESULTS: The metadata obtained from 16 major neurosurgical journals yielded 66,546 research articles. Gender was successfully determined for 96% (127,809/133,578) of first and senior authors, while the remainder (3.9%) were unable to be determined through prediction methods. Across all years, 13.3% (8826) of articles had female first authorship and 9.1% (6073) had female senior authorship. Female first authorship increased significantly over time from 5.8% in 2002 to 17.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Female senior authorship also increased significantly over time, from 5.5% in 2002 to 12.0% in 2019 (p < 0.001). The journals with the highest proportions of female first authors and senior authors were the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics (33.5%) and the Asian Journal of Neurosurgery (23.8%), respectively. Operative Neurosurgery had the lowest fraction of female first (12.4%) and senior (4.7%) authors. There was a significant difference between the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical trainees and the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical first (p < 0.001) and senior (p < 0.001) authors. Articles were also more likely to have a female first author if the senior author of the article was female (OR 2.69, CI 2.52-2.86; p < 0.001). From 1944 to 2019, the Journal of Neurosurgery showed a steady increase in female first and senior authorship, with a plateau beginning in the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: Large meta-analysis techniques have the potential to effectively leverage large amounts of bibliometric data to quantify the representation of female authorship in the neurosurgical literature. The proportion of female authors in major neurosurgical journals has steadily increased. However, the rate of increase in female senior authorship has lagged behind the rate of increase in first authorship, indicating a disparity in academic advancement in women in neurosurgery.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Assessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Neurosurgery Literature: A 20-Year Analysis of Sex Trends in Authorship Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Farhan, S.A.
    ;
    Shahid, I.
    ;
    Siddiqi, J.
    ;
    Khosa, F.
    Background: Publications are considered a major factor for advancement in academia. An effort has been made to study authorship trends in neurosurgery publications. The objective of this study was to investigate authorship trends in the neurosurgery literature for the last 20 years (1998–2018). Methods: Articles for the years 1998, 2008, and 2018 were extracted from Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery, and World Neurosurgery for this retrospective study. Only original articles, case reports, and review articles were included. The gender of the first, senior, and corresponding author was determined. Subspecialty topic, type of paper, geographic origin of articles, and the number of citations for each article were also collected. Results: A total of 3912 articles were included. The number of articles, the total number of authors, and nonexperimental studies increased in the successive decades. A total of 744 women (19.0%) were first authors and 520 (13.3%) were senior authors of their respective publications. A decreasing trend (P < 0.05) was noted between female first authors and male senior authors over time. All 3 journals showed an increasing pattern of female authorships across the 2 decades. Conclusions: A rapid rise in female authorship positions in particular and authorship positions in general demonstrates the diversity that is slowly burgeoning to cater to perspectives and issues that require a multidimensional approach in neurosurgery. Increasing linkages among researchers in neurosurgery on a global scale are evident by the increase in multinational collaborations. Expansive efforts are needed at institutional and individual levels to eradicate sex-based pitfalls that hinder excellence in neurosurgery research. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women in Neurosurgery: Gender Differences in Authorship in High-Impact Neurosurgery Journals through the Last Two Decades Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Aslan, Ayfer
    ;
    Kuzucu, Pelin
    ;
    Karaaslan, Burak
    ;
    Börcek, Alp Özgün
    OBJECTIVE: Despite common gender disparities in authorship across the vast majority of specialties, the presence of a similar lack of equality in neurosurgery literature is not published yet. Therefore the authors examined the changes in representation of women among the first and senior (last) authors of original articles in high-impact neurosurgical journals between 2003 and 2018. METHODS: Data regarding women proportions among the first and senior authors were collected from the issues of Neurosurgery and Journal of Neurosurgery published in 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2018. RESULTS: According to the analysis of 3247 original articles, compared with male authors, female authors have published fewer articles as the first (518 of women, 2729 of men) and senior authors (352 of women, 2884 of men). Nonetheless, the proportion of women in the first authorship represented a significant increase from 2003 to 2018 (from 12% to 16.5%, respectively; P < 0.01), but not in senior authorship (11.7% in 2003 vs. 10.5% in 2018; P > 0.05). Overall, women wrote more research articles than case reports as both first and senior authors (451 and 301 vs. 67 and 51, respectively). In addition, women demonstrated a higher percentage of first authors on female senior author articles (30.4%) than male senior author articles (14.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Although a rising trend in female authorship of neurosurgical literature has been going on through the last 2 decades, this advancement could not be regarded as satisfactory, as the gender gap in authorship is still excessive. Strikingly, female first authors had a tendency of coauthoring with female senior authors.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The role of gender in academic productivity, impact, and leadership among academic spine surgeons Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Agaronnik, Nicole
    ;
    Xiong, Grace X.
    ;
    Uzosike, Akachimere
    ;
    Crawford, Alexander M.
    ;
    Lightsey, Harry M.
    BACKGROUND/CONTEXT: Women represent a small minority of practicing orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons, with spine surgery having a disproportionately low representation relative to other subspecialties. Previous efforts have attempted to characterize gender patterns in authorship amongst select spine journals. However, no study to our knowledge has done a comprehensive assessment of the influence of gender on academic productivity, impact, and leadership amongst academic spine faculty. PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of gender on academic productivity, promotion to leadership positions, and career advancement among academic spine faculty in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Academic spine faculty associated with orthopedic residency, North American Spine Society spine fellowship programs, and American Association of Neurological Surgeons spine fellowship programs. OUTCOME MEASURES: Academic productivity as measured by publications counts, h-index, authorship ranking as well as academic rank and leadership roles METHODS: We identified all spine faculty across orthopedic residency, orthopedic spine fellowship, and neurosurgical spine fellowship programs in the United States, and abstracted academic performance characteristics, cumulative h-index, and complete publication records for each individual faculty member. Proportions of men and women by specialty, academic rank, and leadership were compared with Fisher's exact testing, and comparison of mean h-index and publication counts compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum testing. Adjusted analyses on publication count and h-index were achieved with poisson regression analysis with gender as the primary predictor adjusting for specialty, degrees, academic rank, and seniority based on time since fellowship completion. RESULTS: The representation of women among spine faculty associated with orthopedic residency and North American Spine Society spine fellowship programs was 5.6%. On average, women had 40% fewer total publications (p=.025), h-indices approximately 5 units lower than men (p=.006), 40% fewer total high-impact publications (p=.030), half the senior author publications (p=.005), and half the high-impact senior author publications (p=.007) compared to men. After adjusting for seniority and academic rank, the number of publications in high impact journals no longer differed between men and women, although differences persisted for total publication count and the h-index. Men were significantly more likely to occupy higher academic ranks, with 25.6% of men and 9.5% of women holding the rank of full professor (p=.031), although there was no significant difference in the rate of appointment to leadership positions. Similar findings were encountered among American Association of Neurological Surgeons spine fellowship faculty. CONCLUSIONS: The present study details the low rate of women in academic spine surgery. Furthermore, gender disparities exist in publication volume, impact, and h-indices. A much lower proportion of women hold higher-ranking academic positions compared to men, though appointment to leadership positions was similar between genders. Differences in seniority and publication metrics may in part be due to the relatively younger cohort of women faculty. These findings underscore the need for active investment in diversity and pipeline efforts that facilitate recruitment and support academic productivity of women in spine surgery.