PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11

What Are the Rates and Trends of Women Authors in Three High-impact Orthopaedic Journals from 2006-2017? Open PDF
(2020)
Hiller, Kathryn P.
;
Boulos, Alexandre
;
Tran, Megan M.
;
Cruz, Aristides I.
BACKGROUND: The gender gap among authors publishing research in journals is narrowing in general medicine and various medical and surgical subspecialties. However, little is known regarding the gender gap among authors publishing research in orthopaedic journals. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the proportion of women first and last authors of original research articles in three high-impact orthopaedic journals from 2006 to 2017? (2) What is the proportion women first authors of original research by orthopaedic subspecialty from 2006 to 2017? METHODS: A sample of original research publications from the even numbered months of issues of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® (CORR®), the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American volume (JBJS), and the American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) were examined from 2006 to 2017. These journals were selected because of their clinical relevance, target audience, and relatively high impact factors. Over the studied period, a single author extracted and reviewed pertinent data, including the gender of the first and last authors and the primary subspecialty of the research article. The senior author refereed disputes regarding the primary subspecialty of each included article. The proportion of women first and last authors in each journal was compared between 2006 to 2017 using chi-square analysis. The proportion of women first authors according to orthopaedic subspecialty in which an article primarily focused its study was also compared between 2006 to 2017 using chi-square analysis. RESULTS: Data were collected from 6292 articles, 13% (800) of which were first-authored by women and 10% (604) of which were last-authored by women. From 2006 to 2017, the overall percentage of women first authors in the examined journals increased (from 11% in 2006 to 17% in 2017; odds ratio 1.6563 [95 % CI 1.4945 to 1.8356]; p < 0.001). Overall across the period studied, the percentage of women first authors in JBJS was 14% while 12% of first authors in CORR and AJSM were women. Regarding subspecialty, the percentage of women first authorship ranged from 9% in the shoulder subspecialty to 21% in pediatric orthopaedics across all three journals. CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in the percentage of women first authors in articles published in three high-impact orthopaedic journals from 2006 to 2017. This observed increase is encouraging in terms of promoting gender diversity in orthopaedics and may be reflective of a modest increase in the number of women entering the orthopaedic workforce. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Between 2006 and 2017, the overall number of women first authors in CORR, JBJS, and AJSM modestly increased. This may suggest a nascent narrowing of the gender gap in orthopaedics. Although this is a welcome finding in terms of promoting and encouraging gender diversity in this man-dominated field, the overall percentage of women authorship remains modest, at best. Future investigations should examine whether the modest increase in women first authorship over time found in this study translates into an increased percentage of senior/last authorship in the future, as this may have implications for women orthopaedic workforce retention.
Gender Disparity Trends in Authorship of Hand Surgery Research Open PDF
(2022)
Xu, Raylin F.
;
Varady, Nathan H.
;
Chen, Antonia F.
;
Earp, Brandon E.
Purpose Despite an overall trend towards gender parity, women continue to remain underrepresented in surgical fields. Until recently, women’s representation in hand surgery literature was largely unexplored. The objective of this study was to examine how authorship gender trends among academic hand surgeons have evolved between 2006 and 2019. Methods Original research articles published from 2006 to 2019 in 3 leading clinical hand surgery journals were extracted from PubMed. Publications with a full author first name were analyzed, and the gender of each author was assigned with the validated Genderize algorithm. Analyses were performed to evaluate authorship publication trends, unique authors, and research career productivity. Results From 2006 to 2019, 4,769 articles met the inclusion criteria, and the genders of 17,102 authors were identified. There were 2,848 (16.6%) female authors and 14,254 (83.4%) male authors. The proportion of female authors increased from 13.4% to 19.9% from 2006 to 2019. Similarly, female representation as first and senior authors increased significantly, from 10.9% to 20.1% and 7.6% to 14.2%, respectively. Of the 8,417 unique authors, 1,775 (21.1%) were women and 6,642 (78.9%) were men. Only 3.3% of these unique female authors published 5 or more papers during the study period. Among the 10 most frequently published authors for each gender, 18 of the 20 authors were surgeons. Conclusions There has been substantial progress toward gender parity in academic hand surgery over the last 14 years, and the proportion of women publishing in leadership positions has increased. Clinical relevance Increased gender representation in medicine and research is important for both patients and providers, and these findings suggest that ongoing support and mentorship for women in academic careers should be a priority.
Trends in Gender Disparities in Authorship of Arthroplasty Research Open PDF
(2020)
Xu, Raylin F.
;
Varady, Nathan H.
;
Chen, Antonia F.
BACKGROUND: Despite efforts to address gender disparities in medicine, female representation in orthopaedics lags behind that of other fields, and little work has evaluated gender disparities within the subspecialty of arthroplasty surgery. The objective of this study was to analyze female authorship trends in arthroplasty research from 2002 to 2019. METHODS: Articles published from 2002 to 2019 in 12 clinical orthopaedic and arthroplasty journals were extracted from PubMed. Articles that provided the full name of the first author and contained the terms "arthroplasty," "hip replacement," "knee replacement," or "joint replacement" in the title and/or as keywords were analyzed. The gender of the author was determined with the validated Genderize algorithm, and publication trends were analyzed over time. Descriptive and comparative statistics were computed, and logistic regression was used to evaluate gender trends. RESULTS: From 2002 to 2019, 14,692 articles met the inclusion criteria, and the gender of 63,628 authors was identified. There were 23,626 unique authors; 4,003 (16.9%) were women and 19,623 (83.1%) were men. Female involvement in arthroplasty publications increased from 11.1% in 2002 to 12.6% in 2019 (p < 0.001), and the percentage of female first authors increased from 5.0% in 2002 to 11.3% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Critically, however, the proportion of women as senior authors significantly declined from 8.5% in 2002 to 6.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). From our analysis of U.S. publications with physician senior authors, the proportion of female senior authors remained relatively stable from 1.7% in 2002 to 2.4% in 2019 without a significantly increasing trend (p = 0.88). Overall, on average, women published a mean (and 95% confidence interval) of 1.9 ± 0.1 publications, while men published 2.9 ± 0.1 publications (p < 0.001). The proportion of female senior authors in arthroplasty publications (6.6%) was lower than that of other orthopaedic subspecialties such as sports medicine (9.2%), spine (13.6%), and foot and ankle (13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: While overall female representation and first authorship in arthroplasty literature have increased over time, the paucity of women in senior author roles remains troubling. Future studies should examine why the proportion of women publishing in arthroplasty remains lower than that in most other orthopaedic subspecialties.
Gender Trends in Authorship of Foot and Ankle Academic Literature Over 24 Years Open PDF
(2019)
Vora, M.
;
Kuripla, C.
;
Ouyang, D.
;
Sing, D.C.
Underrepresentation of females in surgery is reflected in research productivity across academic medicine, with male faculty being more likely to publish research than their female counterparts. In this study, we aimed to describe the representation and longevity of female investigators among the authors of articles in 3 foot and ankle research journals from 1993 to 2017. In this retrospective bibliometric analysis, authors from 3 prominent foot and ankle research journals (Foot and Ankle International, The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery, and Foot and Ankle Clinics) were identified. The proportion of female authors who were first, middle, and senior authors and the total publication count per author were determined. From 1993 to 2017, 8132 original articles were published and a total of 6597 (81.1%) had an accessible author list. This allowed us to identify 25,329 total authors, of whom 22,961 (90.7%) were successfully matched to a gender. A total of 9273 unique authors were identified (females, 19.2%). Female representation increased for first and senior authors over the years from 6.5% and 5.9% (1993 to 1997) to 16.9% and 13.1% (2013 to 2017, p < .001), respectively. However, compared with male authors, female authors published fewer articles (mean: 1.7 versus 2.4, p < .001). Of the 2691 authors who first published during 2006 to 2011, 369 authors (13%), consisting of 8.1% females and 15% males (p < .001), continued to publish 5 years after their initial publication. Female representation in academic foot and ankle research has increased >2-fold over the past 2 decades. But despite these advances, compared to male authors, female authors are less likely to continue publishing 5 years after initial publication, and on average publish fewer articles. © 2019 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons
Gender trends in authorship of spine-related academic literature—a 39-year perspective Open PDF
(2017)
Sing, D.C.
;
Jain, D.
;
Ouyang, D.
Background Context Despite recent advances in gender equity in medicine, the representation of women in orthopedic and neurosurgery remains particularly low. Furthermore, compared with their male colleagues, female faculty members are less likely to publish research, limiting opportunities in the academic promotion process. Understanding disparities in research productivity provides insight into the “gender gap” in the spine surgeon workforce. Purpose This study aims to determine the representation and longevity of female physician-investigators among the authors of five spine-related research journals from 1978 to 2016. Study Design This is a retrospective bibliometric review. Methods The authors of original research articles from five prominent spine-related journals (European Spine Journal, The Spine Journal, Spine, Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques, and Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine) were extracted from PubMed. For authors with a complete first name listed, gender was determined by matching first name using an online database containing 216,286 distinct names across 79 countries and 89 languages. The proportion of female first and senior authors was determined during the time periods 1978 to 1994, 1995 to 1999, 2000 to 2004, 2005 to 2009, and 2010 to 2016. The authors who had their first paper published between 2000 and 2009 were included in additional analyses for publication count and longevity (whether additional articles were published 5 years after first publication). Student t test, chi-square analysis, and Cochran-Armitage trend test were used to determine significance between groups. Results From 1978 to 2016, 28,882 original research articles were published in the five spine-related journals. A total of 24,334 abstracts (90.9%) had first names listed, identifying 120,723 authors, in total of which 100,286 were successfully matched to a gender. A total of 33,480 unique authors were identified (female authors: 31.8%). Female representation increased for first and senior authors from 6.5% and 4.7% (1978–1994) to 18.5% and 13.6% (2010–2016, p<.001). Growth in female senior author representation declined after 2000 (12.3% vs. 12.9% vs. 13.5% between 2000–2004, 2005–2009, and 2010–2016). Compared with male authors, on average, female authors published fewer articles (mean: 2.1 vs. 3.3, p<.001). Of 15,304 authors who first published during 2000 to 2009, 3,478 authors (22.7%) continued to publish 5 years after their first publication. Female authors were less likely to continue publishing after their first article (15.3% of female authors vs. 24.8%, p<.001). Conclusions Female representation in academic spine research has doubled over the past 4 decades, although the growth of female representation as senior author has plateaued. Female physician-investigators are half as likely to continue participating in spine-related research longer than 5 years and on average publish half as many articles as senior author. In addition to recruiting more women into research, efforts should be made to identify and address barriers in research advancement and promotion for female physician-investigators. © 2017 Elsevier Inc.
Gender disparities in shoulder and elbow publications Open PDF
(2022)
Sequeira, S.B.
;
Wright, M.A.
;
Murthi, A.M.
Hypothesis/Background: Female representation in orthopedics, and specifically shoulder and elbow surgery, lags behind other surgical subspecialities. There has been a growing interest in recent years to better characterize, and address, gender disparities in the field. The purpose of this investigation was to characterize gender trends in authorship in the shoulder and elbow literature from 2002 to 2020. Methods: Articles published from January 2002 to December 2020 in 15 clinical orthopedic and shoulder- and elbow-specific journals were extracted from the online PubMed database. Articles that included the first name of the first and senior authors and contained keywords related to the shoulder and elbow subspecialty were included. The Genderize algorithm was used to determine each author's gender. Gender-based publication trends from 2002 to 2020 were analyzed using descriptive and significance testing as well as logistic regression. Results: 34,695 articles met inclusion criteria and 52,497 unique authors were identified. Of these unique authors, 10,175 (19.4%) were female and 42,322 (80.6%) were male. On average, each unique female author published 1.7 ± 0.1 manuscripts since 2002 and each male author published 2.5 ± 0.2 (P < .001). Female representation in shoulder and elbow publications began at 10.2% in 2002 and rose to 15.9% in 2020 (P < .001). Female representation in the lead author position began at 4.1% in 2002 and rose to 5.8% in 2020 (P = .009). Female representation in the senior author position began at 6.0% in 2002 and rose to 9.1% in 2020 (P < .001). Conclusion: Although female representation in first, senior, and general authorship lags behind male representation in the shoulder and elbow literature, female authorship has significantly increased since 2002. The same men tend to publish more frequently while the number of unique female authors surpasses the annual representation of female authorship. Efforts to improve female representation in the field of orthopedic surgery should include efforts directed at improving female representation in academic literature. © 2022 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees
How Well Represented Are Women Orthopaedic Surgeons and Residents on Major Orthopaedic Editorial Boards and Publications? Open PDF
(2020)
Rynecki, Nicole D.
;
Krell, Ethan S.
;
Potter, James S.
;
Ranpura, Akash
;
Beebe, Kathleen S.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that women are substantially underrepresented as orthopaedic surgeons and residents compared with other specialties in medicine and medical school. The reasons for this are multifactorial and not completely understood, but previous studies suggest that women may be attracted to fields in which they have female role models. Given that women interested in academia and research may use female editorship and authorship as a proxy for female representation in orthopaedic surgery, we wanted to examine the proportion of women represented in orthopaedic journals and determine if it reflects the distribution of women in orthopaedic surgery as a field. We further wanted to understand if this representation has changed over time in the setting of a slowly shifting gender landscape within orthopaedic surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How are women orthopaedic surgeons and residents represented in orthopaedic journals compared with men? (2) Have these proportions changed in the past two decades in light of relatively new efforts to recruit women to the field of orthopaedic surgery? METHODS: The gender composition of editorial boards and first and last authors were obtained from the 1997, 2007, and 2017 volumes of the following journals: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS), the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (JAAOS), and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® (CORR®). Gender neutral names were searched to obtain a picture to ensure proper tallies. RESULTS: The total combined amount of women first and last authors increased from 88 of 1450 (6%) in 1997 to 152 of 1912 (8%) in 2007 to 723 of 5391 (13%) in 2017. Similarly, three of 113 (3%) editorial board members were women in 1997, three of 105 (3%) were women in 2007 and 10 of 107 (9%) editors were women in 2017. Of note, 0 out of 9 editors-in-chief were women. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current percentage of women orthopaedic surgeons and residents, women are represented equally or in greater numbers as editors and authors in JAAOS, JBJS, and CORR. This may be in part due to women orthopaedic surgeons entering academic medicine at a greater rate than males. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Orthopaedic surgeons serving as mentors to prospective female applicants can cite female representation on editorial boards and as authors as an example of gender parity in the field. Additionally, active orthopaedic surgeons who are women interested in these leadership positions should be encouraged that these opportunities exist, regardless of gender.
Gender and Geographic Origin as Determinants of Manuscript Publication Outcomes: JBMR® Bibliometric Analysis from 2017 to 2019 Open PDF
(2022)
Rivadeneira, F.
;
Loder, R.T.
;
McGuire, A.C.
;
Chitwood, J.R.
;
Duffy, K.
The Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (JBMR®), the flagship journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR), enjoys a premiere position in its field and has a global reach. The journal uses a single-blind peer-review process whereby three editors are typically involved in assessing each submission for publication, in addition to external reviewers. Although emphasizing fairness, rigor, and transparency, this process is not immune to the influence of unconscious biases. The gender and geographic diversity of JBMR® authors, editors, and reviewers has increased over the last three decades, but whether such diversity has affected peer-review outcomes is unknown. We analyzed manuscript acceptance rates based on the gender and geographic origin of authors, reviewers, and Associate Editors. The analysis included 1662 original research articles submitted to JBMR® from September 2017 through December 2019. Gender was assigned using probabilities from an online tool and manually validated through internet searches. Predictor variables of manuscript outcome were determined with multivariate logistic regression analysis. The acceptance rate was highest when the first and last authors were of different genders, and lowest when both authors were men. Reviewer gender did not influence the outcome regardless of the genders of the first and last authors. Associate Editors from all geographical regions tended to select reviewers from their same region. The acceptance rate was highest when the Associate Editor was from Europe. Manuscripts with authors from North America and Australia/New Zealand had greater overall odds of acceptance than those from Europe and Asia. Manuscripts reviewed only by Editorial Board (EB) members had a lower acceptance rate than those refereed by non-EB reviewers or a mix of EB and non-EB reviewers. Overall, the geographical origin of authors, reviewers, and editors, as well as reviewers' EB membership may influence manuscript decisions. Yet, the JBMR® peer-review process remains largely free from gender bias. © 2022 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). © 2022 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).
Evolution and Trends in Male Versus Female Authorship of Articles in Flagship Orthopaedic Journals From 1995 to 2020 Open PDF
(2022)
Powell, Sarah N.
;
Hunting, John C.
;
Frazier, Landon P.
;
Keeling, Laura E.
;
Janowski, Jessie
INTRODUCTION: The gender disparity in orthopaedic surgery has been recognized for many years. Because research affects promotions, this study investigates trends in female authorship in three journals over the past 25 years for both first and senior authors. METHODS: All articles from Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research from 1995 to 2020 in 5-year intervals were downloaded, and the data for first and senior authors were extracted. The sex of the first and senior authors was determined using the validated Genderize algorithm. The demographics of the first and senior author cohorts were analyzed using chi square tests. The trends in female authorship controlling for year and journal were assessed with logistic regression models. RESULTS: Within the studied journals, 5,636 individuals were identified as first authors and 4,572 as senior authors. Sex was determined for 82.59% of the authors. Female first authorship increased significantly from 1995 to 2020 (6.70% to 15.37%, P < 0.001). Similarly, female senior authorship increased significantly from 1995 to 2020 (8.22% to 13.65%, P < 0.001). Overall, there was no significant difference in gender composition of authors between journals (P = 0.700 first author and P = 0.098 senior author). Women were much more likely to publish as first or senior author in later years, regardless of the journal (P < 0.001 first author and P < 0.001 senior author). DISCUSSION: Female authorship in prominent orthopaedic journals has increased markedly from 1995 to 2020 with interjournal differences in senior author gender disparity. Although female orthopaedic surgeons publish at rates equal to or greater than their representation in the specialty, additional research is needed into the persistence of gender disparities in orthopaedics.
Gender diversity at spine surgery academic conferences: a 15-year investigation Open PDF
(2024)
Cartagena-Reyes, M.A.
;
Gupta, M.
;
Roy, J.M.
;
Solomon, E.
;
Yenokyan, G.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Enhancing gender diversity at academic conferences is critical for advancing women's representation and career trajectories in spine surgery. PURPOSE: To discover trends in women's representation at major spine conferences over a 15-year period. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Conference records from the 2007–2021 annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, North American Spine Society, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS). PATIENT SAMPLE: Authors of spine-related presentations. OUTCOME MEASURES: Authorship by gender. METHODS: Retrospective bibliometric analysis with univariate and multivariate modeling to identify trends and predictors of gender diversity. RESULTS: Among 8,948 presentations, 750 (8.4%) had female first authors and 618 (6.9%) had female senior authors. There was no change in rates of female first authorship (p=.41) or senior authorship (p=.88) over time. The strongest predictors of female first authorship were having a female senior author (OR 7.32, p<.001), and delivering presentations at SRS (OR 1.95, p=.001). Factors negatively associated with female first authorship included poster format (OR 0.82, p=.039) and conference location in the United States/Canada (OR 0.76, p=.045). Similar trends were encountered for senior authorship. Productivity per senior author was similar between genders (p=.160); whereas a gender gap in productivity per first author during 2007 to 2011 (p=.020) equalized by 2017 to 2021 (p=.300). Among the 10 most productive authors of each gender, male authors delivered more presentations, but all authors shared similar format, content, and location. CONCLUSIONS: Women's representation in spine-related presentations did not increase at three major conferences over a 15-year period. Our findings regarding the positive effects of female mentorship, and international or virtual venues merit further investigation to address the gender gap. The upstream pipeline of recruiting women into academic spine surgery also needs to be addressed. Level of Evidence: 3 © 2023

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results