PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
7 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Reviewing the reviewers: comparison of review quality and reviewer characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology Open PDF(2005) ;Kliewer, Mark A. ;Freed, Kelly S. ;DeLong, David M. ;Pickhardt, Perry J.Provenzale, James M.OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine which manuscript reviewer characteristics are most strongly associated with reviewer performance as judged by editors of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At the AJR, manuscript reviews are rated by the journal editors on a subjective scale from 1 (lowest) to 4, on the basis of the value, thoroughness, and punctuality of the critique. We obtained all scores for AJR reviewers and determined the average score for each reviewer. We also sent a questionnaire to 989 reviewers requesting specific information regarding the age, sex, radiology subspecialty, number of years serving as a reviewer, academic rank, and practice type of the reviewer. The demographic profiles were correlated with the average quality score for each reviewer. Statistical analysis included correlation analysis and analysis of variance modeling. Reviewer quality scores were also correlated with the scoring of individual reviews and ultimate disposition of 196 manuscripts sent to the AJR during the same period. RESULTS: Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 821 reviewers (83.0%), for whom quality scores were available for 714 (87.0%). Correlation analysis shows that the quality score of reviewers strongly correlated with younger age (p = 0.001). A statistically significant correlation between quality score and practice type was seen (p = 0.008), with reviewers from academic institutions receiving higher scores. No significant correlation was found between quality score and sex (p = 0.72), years of reviewing (p = 0.26), academic rank (p = 0.10), or the ultimate disposition of the manuscript (p = 0.40). The quality score of the reviewers showed no variation by subspecialty (p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: The highest-rated AJR reviewers tended to be young and from academic institutions. The quality of peer review did not correlate with the sex, academic rank, or subspecialty of the reviewer.Item type:Publication, Pre- and post-COVID-19 gender trends in authorship for paediatric radiology articles worldwide: a systematic review Open PDF(2024) ;Kamran, Rakhshan ;Jackman, Liam ;Chan, Cynthia ;Lee, Ann C.Kamran, AleezaBACKGROUND: Gender inequalities in academic medicine persist despite progress over the past decade. Evidence-based targeted interventions are needed to reduce gender inequalities. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on gender trends in authorship of paediatric radiology research worldwide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospectively registered, PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2018, to May 29, 2023, with no restrictions on country of origin. Screening and data extraction occurred independently and in duplicate. Gender of first, last, and corresponding authors were determined using an artificial intelligence-powered, validated, multinational database ( www.genderize.io ). Two time periods were categorised according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering: pre-COVID (prior to March 2020) and peak and post-COVID (March 2020 onwards). One-sample binomial testing was used to analyse proportion of authorship based on gender. Categorical variables were described as frequencies and percentages, and compared using testing chi-square or Fisher exact testing, with a threshold of P<0.05 representing statistical significance. RESULTS: In total, 922 articles were included with 39 countries represented. A statistically significant difference in authorship based on gender persisted during the peak and post-COVID time period (March 2020 onwards) where women represented a statistically significant lower proportion of last (35.5%) and corresponding (42.7%) authors (P<0.001, P=0.001, respectively). Statistically significant differences for first authors were not found in either period (P=0.08 and P=0.48). CONCLUSION: This study identifies differences in gender trends for authorship in paediatric radiology research worldwide. Future efforts to increase authorship by women are needed.Item type:Publication, Underrepresentation of Women on Radiology Editorial Boards. Open PDF(2019) ;Jalilianhasanpour, Rozita ;Charkhchi, Paniz ;Mirbolouk, MohammadhassanYousem, David M.PURPOSE: Women in radiology are known to be underrepresented in academic leadership positions. We sought to determine if women are appropriately represented on editorial boards and editor-in-chief positions compared with their authorship contributions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed the first and senior authorship male versus female gender breakdown of manuscripts published in nine high-impact American radiology journals 1 month per year from 2002 to 2017. We looked at the gender of the first authors, senior authors, editorial board members, and editors-in-chief of these journals to see if there was a gender discrepancy. RESULTS: We assessed 3,702 first authors, 3,702 senior authors, and 9,400 editorial board members. Women were underrepresented on the editorial boards compared with their first-authored manuscript contribution in our sample of articles from every journal for every year and were underrepresented compared with their senior-authored manuscript contributions in 119 of 139 (85.6%) journal-years. The percentage of women as first authors (mean = 29.3 ± 9.9), senior authors (mean = 20.7 ± 8.1), and editorial board members (mean = 13.4 ± 6.5) showed major differences (P < .001). This gap did not significantly narrow over the 16 years of study. Notably, there was no woman as editor-in-chief for any of the journal-years. CONCLUSION: There is a gender gap in the composition of editorial boards in radiology compared with authorship contributions by women. Given the implications of editorial board assignment and editorship on women's academic advancement, journals may wish to consider strategies that will narrow the gap.Item type:Publication, Gender trends in radiology authorship: A 35-year analysis Open PDF(2016) ;Piper, C.L. ;Scheel, J.R. ;Lee, C.I.Forman, H.P.Objective. The purpose of this study was to describe trends over time in female authorship in the radiology literature and to investigate the tendency of female first authors to publish with female senior authors. Materials and Methods. Data on the gender of academic physician authors based in the United States for all major articles published in three general radiology journals-Radiology, AJR, and Academic Radiology-were collected and analyzed for the years 1978, 1988, 1998, 2008, and 2013. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify significant trends over time, and a chi-square test of independence was performed to determine significant relations between the genders of first and senior authors. Results. The gender of 4182 of 4217 (99.17%) authors with MD degrees was determined. The proportion of original research articles published by women as first authors increased from 8.33% in 1978 to 32.35% in 2013 (p < 0.001). The proportion of original research articles with women as senior authors increased from 6.75% in 1978 to 21.90% in 2013 (p < 0.001). Female first and senior authorship increased significantly over time (first author, p < 0.001; senior author, p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant relation between the genders of first and senior authors of original research articles and guest editorials (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Over 35 years, there was a statistically significant upward linear trend of female physician participation in authorship of academic radiology literature. Female first authors were more likely to publish with female senior authors. © American Roentgen Ray Society.Item type:Publication, Collaboration Metrics Among Female and Male Researchers: A 5-Year Review of Publications in Major Radiology Journals Open PDF(2018) ;Campbell, James C. ;Yoon, Sora C.Grimm, Lars J.RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Women are under-represented in radiology, but the implications of this under-representation are poorly understood. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if articles published by women in major radiology journals were more collaborative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following an institutional review board exemption, we reviewed all original research articles in Radiology, in the American Journal of Roentgenology, and in Academic Radiology from 2011 to 2015. For each article, the gender of the first and the last authors and proxy measures of collaboration were recorded, including the total number of authors, female authors, departments, and institutions. Nominal logistic regression analysis was used to test for associations while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: There were 1934 articles analyzed. Female first and last authors represented 30.2% (585 of 1934) and 24.4% (473 of 1934) of the articles, respectively. A female first author was associated with more female last authors (36% vs 20%, P < .001), total female authors (2.9 vs 1.2, P < .001), and departments (3.3 vs 3.0, P < .001). Similarly, a female last author was associated with more female first authors (44% vs 26%, P = .001), total female authors (3.1 vs 1.2, P < .001), departments (3.5 vs 3.0 P < .001), and institutions (2.3 vs 1.9, P = .006). Each additional female author increased the mean number of institutions by 0.33 and departments by 0.46 on linear regression. First- or last-author gender was not associated with total authors (P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: Original research articles published with a female first or last author were associated with more departments and institutions, but not with the total number of authors, suggesting that women engage in some metrics of more collaborative research.Item type:Publication, Authorship and Impact of Gender-Specific Research in Major Radiology Journals Open PDF(2019) ;Campbell, James C. ;Yoon, Sora C.Grimm, Lars J.PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to quantify the relationship between author gender and publication topic, as well as the impact of gender-related research. METHODS: We reviewed all original research publications in Radiology, American Journal of Roentgenology, and Academic Radiology from 2011 through 2015. For each article, we recorded the gender of all authors and the last author H-index, years in practice, and academic rank. The total citations and citation rate (citations per year) were calculated for each article. Articles were categorized as gender-neutral, women's health, or men's health. RESULTS: There were 1,934 publications involving 11,657 authors. Women represented 30% of first, 25% of last, and 28% of all authors. There were 1,596 (83%) gender-neutral, 276 (14%) women's health, and 61 (3%) men's health articles. Women's health articles were associated with a female first (odds ratio [OR] = 5.0, P < .001) and last author (OR = 6.4, P < .001), as well as more female authors (male = 1.4, female = 3.6, P < .001). Men's health articles were associated with a male first (OR = 2.6, P = .004) and last author (OR = 2.2, P = .03). There were significantly more citations for men's (43.5 ± 54.9, P < .001) and women's health (27.6 ± 37.5, P < .008) articles than gender-neutral articles (21.9 ± 28.9). Similarly, the article citation rate was higher for men's (10.6 ± 11.3, P < .001) and women's health (6.8 ± 8.5, P = .004) articles than gender-neutral publications (5.3 ± 7.0). CONCLUSION: Radiology researchers publish more often on topics related to their own gender. Furthermore, men's and women's health research generates more citations than gender-neutral research.Item type:Publication, Gender gap in articles published in European Radiology and CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology: evolution between 2002 and 2016 Open PDF(2020) ;Bernard, Chloé ;Pommier, Romain ;Vilgrain, ValérieRonot, MaximeOBJECTIVES: To evaluate gender differences in the authorship of articles published in two major European radiology journals, European Radiology (EurRad) and CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR). METHODS: A retrospective bibliometric analysis was performed of 2632 papers published in EurRad and CVIR sampled over a period of 14 years (2002-2016). The authors' gender was determined. The analysis was focused on first and last authors. In addition, the characteristics of the articles (type, origin, radiological subspecialty, and country) were noted. RESULTS: Overall, 23% of first authors and 10% of the last authors were women. The proportion of women significantly increased over time in EurRad from 22% in 2002 to 35% in 2016 for first authors (p > 0.001), and from 13% in 2002 to 18% in 2016 for last authors (p = 0.05). There was no significant increase in the proportion of female authors in CVIR over time. Female authors were more frequently identified in breast imaging (48%), pediatrics, and gynecological imaging (29%). There were more female authors in articles from Spain (34%), the Netherlands (28%), France, Italy, and South Korea (26%). Forty-one percent and 21% of women were first authors with a woman or man as last author, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There was a significant increase in female authorship in original diagnostic but not interventional imaging research articles between 2002 and 2016, with a strong influence of the radiological subspecialty. Women were significantly more frequently first authors when the last author was a woman. KEY POINTS: • There was a significant increase in female authorship in original diagnostic but not interventional imaging research articles between 2002 and 2016. • There is a strong influence of the radiological subspecialty on the percentage of female authors. • Women are significantly more frequently first authors when the last author is a woman.