PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.OphthalmologySubject: search.filters.subject.Gender

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item type:Publication,
    Authorship Trends of Women in Retina: A 25-Year Analysis Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Nahar, A.
    ;
    Mahmoudzadeh, R.
    ;
    Rama, M.
    ;
    Soares, R.R.
    ;
    Yonekawa, Y.
    Objective: To examine the trends in first and last authorship of women within clinical retina research over the last 25 years. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants: First and last author names were retrieved from original articles published between January 1, 1995, and January 1, 2021, in the American Journal of Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology (Archives of Ophthalmology), Ophthalmology, and Retina. Methods: The medical subject heading major term “retina” was used in PubMed to filter publications specific to the field of retina. Publications by single authors and collaborative study groups and those classified as comments, letters, and editorials were excluded. First and last author names were obtained, and Gender API was used to assign sex. Names were crosschecked with the American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS) directory for United States–based authors. Main Outcome Measures: The proportion of male and female first and last authors throughout the study period and the association between first and last authorship gender were assessed. Results: A total of 4142 articles were included. The percentage of women in first and last authorship positions significantly increased from 23% to 37.7% and 14.2% to 24.6%, respectively, over 25 years (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). When the last authors were women, 32.5% of the first authors were women, and when the last authors were men, 27.1% of the first authors were women (P = 0.002). Based on the ASRS 2020 directory, 17% of practicing retina specialists in the United States were women in 2020. For publications in 2020, 28.2% of the first authors and 22.3% of the last authors of retina publications from the United States were women (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Although a disparity in authorship persists in the subspecialties of ophthalmology, this data suggest that retina is a field where the gap is improving. Mentorship by senior female authors is associated with a higher proportion of female first authors. © 2022 American Academy of Ophthalmology
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women's Authorship of Reviews in Ophthalmic Journals over Time Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Gertig, D.
    ;
    Keane, M.C.
    ;
    Matthews, J.M.
    ;
    Williams, K.A.
    ;
    Smith, J.R.
    Purpose:To investigate prevalence and trends in women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals over 2 decades.Design:Literature survey.Methods:Total number of authors, and number and gender of first and senior (last-named) authors, were identified in all full reviews published in Prog Retin Eye Res, Surv Ophthalmol, and Curr Opin Ophthalmol for the calendar years 1999, 2009, and 2019. The gender of authors was assigned manually by multiple methods. The subspecialty area of each review was captured by keyword and text search. Country of origin was determined from attributions of first and senior authors.Results:The gender of 841 first and senior authors was assigned unequivocally for 471 articles (96%). The frequency of women's authorship rose significantly over time (1999, 2009, 2019) for both first authors (19%, 32%, 44%; P < 0.001) and senior authors (16%, 19%, 29%; P = 0.018). The number of single-author reviews decreased significantly over time (P < 0.001), as did the proportion of reviews with neither a first nor a senior woman author (P < 0.001). Women's first authorship increased over time for reviews on glaucoma (P < 0.001), while women's senior authorship increased for anterior segment/cataract (P = 0.036). The proportion of reviews with a woman first or senior author did not differ by country of origin (P = 0.887 and P = 0.520, respectively).Conclusions:Women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals increased significantly over the 20-year period, but a gender disparity remained: in 2019, more than 55% of first authors, and more than 70% of senior authors, were men. © 2021 Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology. All rights reserved.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender distribution in publishing in five leading optometry journals Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Cardona, G.
    ;
    Herrera, A.
    Purpose: To explore gender distribution in authorship and citation parameters of articles published in five optometry journals included in the Ophthalmology category of Journal Citation Reports. Methods: The Scopus database was used to retrieve all citable articles published in 2011 and 2021 in Optometry and Vision Science, Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, Clinical Experimental Optometry, Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, and Eye and Contact Lens. Gender of the first, last and single authors of all articles, and citation parameters of articles published in 2011 up to May 2023 were determined. Gender of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board of these journals was investigated (May 2023). Results: Only one journal had a female editor-in-chief and three journals had more males than females in their editorial board. In 2011 and 2021, respectively, 40.1% and 48.0% of articles had female as the first authors ((Formula presented.) = 5.77; p = 0.02), and 32.7% and 39.6% had female as the last authors ((Formula presented.) = 4.61; p = 0.03). Gender parity was observed in one journal for the first author and none for the last author in 2011, and in three journals for the first author and one for the last author in 2021. Regarding combinations of male (M) and female (F) first and last authorship positions, the authors of articles in 2011 were MM (44.5%), FM (22.8%), FF (17.3%) and MF (15.4%), and MM (34.6%), FM (25.8%), FF (22.1%) and MF (17.5%) in 2021. Differences between 2011 and 2021 were statistically significant ((Formula presented.) = 9.80; p = 0.02). The proportion of authorship combinations did not show statistically significant differences among journals in 2011 or in 2021. Neither citation nor self-citation were influenced by gender. Conclusions: Gender disparities persist in optometry journals, with females being under-represented in senior and leadership positions. Increasing the awareness of gender disparity in authorship is a necessary step towards ensuring fairness in science in general, and optometry in particular. © 2024 The Authors. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of College of Optometrists.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The Extent of Gender Gap in Citations in Ophthalmology Literature Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Cao, Suqi
    ;
    Xiong, Yue
    ;
    Zhang, Wenhua
    ;
    Zhou, Jiawei
    ;
    He, Zhifen
    PURPOSE: To investigate the severity and causes of gender imbalance in the counts of ophthalmology citations. METHODS: The PubMed database was searched to identify cited papers that were published in four journals (Prog Retin Eye Res, Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmol, and Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci) between August 2015 and July 2020, and those that referenced these cited papers by 2021 July (i.e., citing papers). The gender category of a given paper is defined by the gender of the first and last author (MM, FM, MF, and FF; M means male and F means female). A generalized additive model to predict the expected proportion was fitted. The difference between the observed proportion and expected proportion of citations of a paper's gender category was the primary outcome. RESULTS: The proportion of female-led (MF and FF) papers slightly increased from 27% in 2015 to 30% in 2020. MM, FM, MF, and FF papers were cited as -9.3, -1.5, 13.0, and 23.9% more than expected, respectively. MM papers cited 13.9% more male-led (MM and FM) papers than female-led papers, and FF papers cited 33.5% fewer male-led papers than female-led papers. The difference between the observed proportion and expected proportion of MM citing papers within male-led and female-led cited papers grew at a rate of 0.13 and 0.67% per year. CONCLUSION: The high frequency of citations of female-led papers might narrow the gender gap in the citation count within ophthalmology. These findings show that papers by female-led are less common, so the gender gap might still exist even with their high citation count.