PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 12

Gender inequity in leadership positions in spinal societies worldwide Open PDF
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2026-05-14)
Rawall, Saurabh
;
Taylor, Sean
;
Peterson, Asa
;
Shrother, Ellyn
;
Rajaram, Sakthivel
PURPOSE: Orthopaedics and Neurosurgery rank as the worst with regards to the percentage of female residents. This trend carries on in spinal subspeciality training. The gap in gender equity increases significantly in academic leadership positions, including department chairs and full-time faculty, as well as speakers and faculty at conferences. The purpose of our study was to analyze the percentage of female representation in the leadership of spinal societies globally. METHODS: We evaluated the current leadership teams of national and international spine societies and recorded the percentage of females. RESULTS: We studied gender data of 73 spinal societies worldwide. 36 out of these had no female representation. Overall, 148 out of 1977 (7.5%) leadership positions were occupied by females. European Spine societies had the best gender ratio (16.9%), followed by North America (7.2%). Asia Pacific region had the worst gender ratio (1.2%). Middle East/Africa region and South America performed marginally better with 2.8% and 3.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Diversity improves innovation and quality of patient care. Female spinal surgeon leaders serve as role models and mentors. More needs to be done by our spinal societies to address gender disparity. Our article will provide data on an important aspect of gender disparity in spine surgery so that corrective measures can be initiated. There is an enormous gender disparity in leadership positions in spine societies worldwide. This phenomenon was observed across all regions, with Middle East/Africa and Asia Pacific regions recording the largest gender discrepancy.
Spinal neurosurgery: Trends in female authorship contribution over 5-Year publication history Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2025-10)
Campanaro, Giovanni
;
Centini, Francesca Romana
;
Sicca, Cecilia
;
Davico, Jazmin
;
Musella, Emanuele
In the last few years, more efforts have been made to increase gender equity in medical specialties. Nevertheless, spinal neurosurgery continues to be one of the most male-dominated subspecialties in neurosurgery. This bibliometric analysis sought to explore the representation of female authors in major neurosurgical publications between September 2017 and August 2022, with a focus on first and last authorship roles across journals and countries. The paper analyzed 3171 unique publications within a framework of 93 high-impact neurosurgery-related journals. Results showed that female authors were 14,25 % of first authors and 7,88 % of last authors, and that only 2,11 % of articles had both female first and last authors. Country of affiliation and the journal of publication significantly influenced the author's gender representations, with Scandinavian states and certain journals, like Neurocritical Care, showing relatively high percentages of female authorship. Even if there has been minor progress over the recent past, disparities nowadays persist, potentially limiting diversity in perspectives and advancements in this field. These disparities underline the presence and the influence of systemic and cultural factors impeding gender equity, and underscoring the critical need for proactive measures to foster it, including mentorship programs, institutional support, and policies for balanced opportunities. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified inequities in this field, disproportionately impacting female academics due to increased domestic responsibilities without the corresponding implementation of support systems. The significant role of mentorship in improving female representation was also highlighted by this analysis: our data indicated higher collaboration rates between female first and last authors in the field of spinal neurosurgery. To address these challenges, efforts must be made starting during residency, with the aim of targeting systemic barriers and cultural biases. The implementation of inclusive policies, like on-site childcare programs, and fostering international collaboration, might help to reduce these disparities and to ensure that diversity drives innovation in spinal neurosurgery. Such an approach is essential for addressing inequity, which is not merely a matter of fairness but is central to advancing the field. This would ensure that only talent and hard work are what determine success in spinal neurosurgery, which is imperative for the progress of the speciality, enabling diverse perspectives to shape the future of patient care, research, and academic leadership.
Female authorship in global research: a bibliometric study of high- and low-income country collaborations Open PDF
(Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG), 2025-03-01)
Totis, Francesca
;
Colella, Filippo Emanuele
;
Safa, Adrian
;
Stefini, Roberto
;
Cannizzaro, Delia
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine female authorship in research from collaborations between high-income countries (HICs) and lower-middle-income and low-income countries (LMICs/LICs) across two time periods: 2018–2020 and 2021–2023. METHODS A bibliometric analysis of neurosurgical research articles from the Scopus database, published between 2018 and 2023, was performed to investigate collaboration trends between HICs and LMICs/LICs. Only neurosurgical publications were included, and female authors were identified based on names traditionally associated with female gender identity, verified through online searches and tools such as Genderize.io. Articles with more than 25 authors, commentaries, letters, and news items were excluded to ensure a focus on original research. The selected articles spanned various neurosurgical specialties and were restricted to English-language journals with an impact factor greater than 1. The country affiliations of first, corresponding, and last authors were categorized using the 2018 World Bank classification to understand collaboration patterns across income levels. RESULTS The analysis revealed a steady increase in neurosurgical publications from 2018 to 2023, with a notable rise in the second triennium (2021–2023). Authors from HICs consistently held the majority of first, corresponding, and last authorship positions. Concerning first authorship, authors with affiliations from HICs increased from 66% in the first triennium to 75% in the second. Similarly, corresponding authors from HICs increased from 75% to 82% over the same period. Male authors dominated all key authorship roles, with 127 male-led first authorships compared with 46 female-led first authorships in the second triennium. This male predominance persisted in corresponding and last author roles as well. CONCLUSIONS Global neurosurgical research is growing but significant gender disparities persist, especially in LMICs/LICs, with female researchers underrepresented in key authorship roles, requiring targeted efforts to address systemic barriers and promote gender equity in academic leadership.
Gender disparities among speakers at major spine conferences Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2025-10)
Lee, Yunsoo
;
Issa, Tariq Z.
;
Lambrechts, Mark J.
;
Carey, Preston
;
Becsey, Alexander
PURPOSE: To examine 10-year trends in gender representation in speaking roles at major spine conferences. BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Medical conferences play an important role in career opportunities. There is little analysis on gender representation of major spine conferences despite several studies demonstrating gender disparities within spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study. SAMPLE: A total of 20,181 abstract speakers across 10 years of academic conferences for 6 spine societies. OUTCOME MEASURES: Percent of female abstract presenters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collated the annual meeting programs of six major spine conferences (North American Spine Society (NASS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS), International Meeting on Advanced Spine Techniques (IMAST), Global Spine Congress (GSC), American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AANS/CNS) Spine Summit, and the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS)) dating from 2013 to 2022. Departmental websites, society webpages, or personal social media were identified for images or the use of gendered pronouns in order to determine speaker gender for each speaker type. All categorical variables were compared using Pearson chi-square analysis. RESULTS: Women constituted 1,816 (9.0%) of all 20,181 identified conference speakers. Female representation was highest at NASS (N=680, 12.2%) but lowest at CSRS (6.6%) and GSC (7.1%). Spine Summit (7.4%), IMAST (9.92%), and GSC (9.87%) demonstrated the largest annual percent increases in female representation. Institutions in Middle East and Africa (1.4%), and Central and South America (1.8%) supported the lowest percent of female speakers. Women were significantly less likely to be speakers or moderators/course faculty than to be podium abstract presenters (p<.001). The percent of women as invited speakers (10.4% vs 5.5%, p=.001) and moderators (11.4% vs 3.7%, p<.001) increased significantly over the study period, with annual increases of 8.8% and 20.8%, respectively, from 2013 to 2022 (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: While academic spine societies have made significant progress in promoting gender representation, especially among invited speakers and session moderators, women continue to be underrepresented compared to the percent of women in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery
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.
Gender disparity in editorial boards of journals in neurology Open PDF
(2020)
Mariotto, Sara
;
Beatrice, Giorgia
;
Carta, Sara
;
Bozzetti, Silvia
;
Mantovani, Alessandro
Despite the widely accepted benefits, at present, gender equity is a challenge for women, also in science.1 In this context, according to the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization's Women in Science data, women represented approximately 30% of researchers in 2018, whereas nearly 75% of trainees, health workers, and faculty involved in global health were characterized by women in the same year.2 In neurology, the analysis of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Report led to estimate that in 2016, women were approximately 32% of all US neurologists, whereas in 2008, they were nearly 25%.3 In addition, it also appears that women researchers are much less represented than men among editorial boards of various scientific journals.4,5 In 2011, Amrein et al.4 reported that women represented approximately 18% of all editorial board members of 60 top-ranked journals, whereas they decreased to less than 15% when considering the top 5 neurology journals.
The rise of citational justice: how scholars are making references fairer Open PDF
(Nature Publishing Group, 2022)
Kwon, Diana
An emerging movement aims to push researchers to pay more heed to inequities in scholarly citations.
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.
Gender Prevalence and Trends in Otology and Neurotology Publications Open PDF
(2021)
Schauwecker, N.
;
Kaplan, A.
;
Hunter, J.B.
Objective:To assess otology and neurotology authorship by gender, subject, and country of origin from 2000 to 2019.Study Design:Retrospective review of otology and neurotology publications in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2019 from 10 prominent journals within otolaryngology.Main Outcome Measures:Demographics for first through third and final authors, including gender, degree, coauthorship, as well as number of authors, subject matter, and region of origin for each publication.Results:A total of 4,411 neurotology articles published in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2019 were analyzed. During the study period, the proportion of female authors increased from 22.3% in 2000 to 33.9% in 2019 (p<0.0001). However, authorship position analysis demonstrated no increase in final female authorship (22.5% in 2019, from 19.4% in 2000, p=0.112). Geographic region analysis demonstrated a similar overall global trend toward an increase in female authors. When considering author gender by position, North America, the Middle East, and Africa failed to demonstrate significant increasing trends for female final authors. Female final authors were also significantly less likely to have medical degrees than final male authors, (37.4% versus 78.6%, respectfully, p=<0.0001). Finally, women published more often within the subjects of pediatrics and audiology (46.5% and 37.3% of final authors, p<0.0001).Conclusions:Female authorship in otology and neurotology has increased globally. With the predominant number of articles originating from North America, and articles originating from North America failing to demonstrate an increase in female final authorship, overall, final female authorship did not change during the study period.Professional Practice Gap and Educational Need:There is no comprehensive study exploring gender distribution within only the specialty of otology and neurotology. While it is known that more women are becoming otolaryngologists, it is unknown if this increase is reflected in otology and neurotology publications, domestically and internationally.Learning Objective:To understand if gender biases and/or differences exist within otology and neurotology publications.Desired Result:Identify trends in otology and neurotology publications to address particular barriers to female publication within the field. © 2021 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
Gender and geographical disparity in editorial boards of journals in psychology and neuroscience Open PDF
(2022)
Palser, Eleanor R.
;
Lazerwitz, Maia
;
Fotopoulou, Aikaterini
We reviewed publicly available information from the top 50 journals worldwide in psychology and neuroscience to infer the proportions of editors by gender and country of affiliation. In both fields, the proportions of male and female editors differed significantly, both across editorial roles and within various role categories. Moreover, for 76% of psychology journals and 88% of neuroscience journals more than 50% of editors were male, whereas only 20% and 10%, respectively, had a similar proportion of female editors. US-based academics outnumbered those from other countries as editors in both psychology and neuroscience beyond what would be expected from approximate rates of senior psychology and neuroscience scholars worldwide. Our findings suggest that editorial positions in academic journals—possibly one of the most powerful decision-making roles in academic psychology and neuroscience—are balanced in neither gender nor geographical representation.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results