PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

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

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
  • 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,
    Gender disparities in the author bylines of articles published in clinical neuropsychology journals from 1985 to 2019 Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Matchanova, Anastasia
    ;
    Avci, Gunes
    ;
    Babicz, Michelle A.
    ;
    Thompson, Jennifer L.
    ;
    Johnson, Briana
    Objective: Women are becoming more prevalent in clinical neuropsychology, but gender bias and disparities persist across multiple professional domains. This study examined potential gender disparities in historical authorship trends across commonly read journals in clinical neuropsychology. Method: Analyses were conducted on 10,531 articles published in six clinical neuropsychology journals from 1985 to 2019. Each author was coded as either a man or a woman using the OpenGenderTracking Project database. Results: On average, women comprised 43.3% (±30.6) of the authors listed in clinical neuropsychology article bylines and were lead and/or corresponding author on 50.3% of these papers. Findings varied by journal, with Child Neuropsychology having the best representation of women across several study metrics. Women comprised an increasing proportion of authors over time and the gender gap in clinical neuropsychology is smaller than was recently reported for the broader field of psychology; nevertheless, the recent rates of women as authors lag behind the prevalence of women in clinical neuropsychology. Encouragingly, gender was not associated with the number of times an article was cited. Articles that included women in leadership roles had significantly more authors overall and specifically more women authors. Conclusions: Women are under-represented as authors in clinical neuropsychology journals, but they are becoming more common and their papers are cited just as frequently as men. Efforts to increase women as research mentors and sponsors may help to further close the publishing gender gap in clinical neuropsychology.
  • 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,
    A Qualitative Study of Facilitators, Barriers, and Gender Disparities in Academic Neurology Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Dy-Hollins, Marisela E.
    ;
    Hall, Deborah A.
    ;
    Cahill, Carolyn M.
    ;
    Meyer, Ana-Claire L.
    ;
    Peltier, Amanda C.
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To understand the challenges and facilitators of a successful academic neurology research career broadly and to identify gender-based disparities specifically. METHODS: In 2019, participants self-identifying as researchers, preregistered for the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Annual Meeting, ≥7 years out of residency, and authors of ≥1 AAN meeting abstract submission (2006-2009) were selected to participate in the qualitative study (purposeful sampling strategy). To increase diversity, 15 participants were invited by members involved in the AAN until interviews were complete. The AAN at the time of the study asked gender using sex-based terms. Participants were asked predetermined and open-ended questions. Themes were generated using a flexible coding methodology. RESULTS: Sixty neurologists (31 women, 29 men) participated in the focus groups and individual interviews. Six predetermined domains relevant to a successful neurology research career were explored: success definitions, facilitators, barriers, biases and harassment, mitigation strategies, and participant recommendations. Gender-based differences were noted during discussions focused on barriers and biases and harassment. Lack of women mentors, under-representation of women in senior faculty positions, and competing responsibilities when children are young were identified as barriers to women's success. Participants acknowledged that known gender disparities in compensation, academic promotion, and publications disproportionately affect women. Women shared more experiences of bias and harassment. Some men felt that gender-based biases were minimal to nonexistent. Participants shared their recommendations on ways to mitigate gender disparities and pursue a neurology research career. Leadership involvement locally and nationally in advocating and implementing change outside academic institutions was also mentioned as being valuable. DISCUSSION: Our findings may not be generalizable to academic neurologists outside the United States. Women academic neurology researchers experienced disparities across several domains affecting success: lower compensation, fewer women mentors, bias, and harassment. Women are less likely to be promoted, have less research success, and job satisfaction. Shared experiences of bias and harassment among women neurology researchers indicate continuing opportunity for education among departments and colleagues for preventive measures. These qualitative results indicate gender disparities among US-based neurology researchers and highlight the importance of the continued need to work toward equality and equity in disparate gender-related issues in the careers of neurology researchers.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Dworkin, Jordan D.
    ;
    Linn, Kristin A.
    ;
    Teich, Erin G.
    ;
    Zurn, Perry
    ;
    Shinohara, Russell T.
    Similarly to many scientific disciplines, neuroscience has increasingly attempted to confront pervasive gender imbalances. Although publishing and conference participation are often highlighted, recent research has called attention to the prevalence of gender imbalance in citations. Because of the downstream effects of citations on visibility and career advancement, understanding the role of gender in citation practices is vital for addressing scientific inequity. Here, we investigate whether gendered patterns are present in neuroscience citations. Using data from five top neuroscience journals, we find that reference lists tend to include more papers with men as first and last author than would be expected if gender were unrelated to referencing. Importantly, we show that this imbalance is driven largely by the citation practices of men and is increasing over time as the field diversifies. We assess and discuss possible mechanisms and consider how researchers might approach these issues in their own work.
  • 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,
    Influences for Gender Disparity in Academic Neuroradiology. Open PDF 
    (2018)
    Ahmadi, M.
    ;
    Khurshid, K.
    ;
    Sanelli, P. C.
    ;
    Jalal, S.
    ;
    Chahal, T.
    BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There has been extensive interest in promoting gender equality within radiology, a predominately male field. In this study, our aim was to quantify gender representation in neuroradiology faculty rankings and determine any related factors that may contribute to any such disparity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the academic and administrative faculty members of neuroradiology divisions for all on-line listed programs in the US and Canada. After excluding programs that did not fulfill our selection criteria, we generated a short list of 85 US and 8 Canadian programs. We found 465 faculty members who met the inclusion criteria for our study. We used Elsevier's SCOPUS for gathering the data pertaining to the publications, H-index, citations, and tenure of the productivity of each faculty member. RESULTS: Gender disparity was insignificant when analyzing academic ranks. There are more men working in neuroimaging relative to women (χ(2) = 0.46; P = .79). However, gender disparity was highly significant for leadership positions in neuroradiology (χ(2) = 6.76; P = .009). The median H-index was higher among male faculty members (17.5) versus female faculty members (9). Female faculty members have odds of 0.84 compared with male faculty members of having a higher H-index, adjusting for publications, citations, academic ranks, leadership ranks, and interaction between gender and publications and gender and citations (9). CONCLUSIONS: Neuroradiology faculty members follow the same male predominance seen in many other specialties of medicine. In this study, issues such as mentoring, role models, opportunities to engage in leadership/research activities, funding opportunities, and mindfulness regarding research productivity are explored.