PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.Sports MedicineViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Institutional

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    A 46-year analysis of gender trends in academic authorship in orthopaedic sports medicine Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Kim, C.-Y.
    ;
    Sivasundaram, L.
    ;
    Trivedi, N.N.
    ;
    Gilmore, A.
    ;
    Gillespie, R.J.
    Introduction:Participation of women in medicine has increased markedly in recent decades, but gender disparities still exist, particularly in academic medicine. To provide insight into the gender gap, specifically in academic orthopaedic sports medicine, we investigated the relationship between gender and authorship in orthopaedic sports literature from 1972 to 2018.Methods:Information about every original article in four prominent orthopaedic sports medicine journals between 1972 and 2018 was extracted from PubMed. The proportions of female first, second, middle, and senior authors over time were determined. Gender influences on level of evidence, academic degrees, and academic productivity and longevity were also studied. Student t-Test, multiple linear regression, chi-square test, Cochran-Armitage trend test, and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used to determine significance between groups.Results:In our sample, 16.6% of all authors were female. The proportion of female authors increased from 2.6% (1972 to 1979) to 14.7% (2010 to 2018). Female authors averaged fewer publications (1.9 versus 2.8 articles for male authors) and were more likely to be attributed middle authorship (45.9% versus 37.1%) than senior authorship (14.7% versus 22.1%, P < 0.001). Female authors were more likely to be full-Time research staff, such as a PhD (18.2% versus 9.0%, P < 0.001), which correlated with a higher level of evidence (B =-0.162, P < 0.001). Gender differences in academic longevity decreased over decades (1972 to 1989, 1990 to 1999, 2000 to 2008), demonstrated by decreasing significance of Kaplan-Meier log-rank tests (<0.01, <0.01, 0.045).Conclusion:Female investigators in orthopaedic sports medicine are authoring publications at a growing rate, increasing almost sevenfold from 1972 to 2018. Although women published two-Thirds the volume of male investigators overall, and were more likely to be full-Time research staff, gender differences in academic productivity and longevity have decreased over time.Level of Evidence:Level III, Retrospective Cohort Design, Observational Study. © 2019 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Prevalence of female authors in case reports published in the medical literature Open PDF 
    (2019)
    Hsiehchen, D.
    ;
    Hsieh, A.
    ;
    Espinoza, M.
    IMPORTANCE Underrepresentation of female authors in research publications is prevalent, but it is unclear whether this is attributable to sex disparities in research conduct or authorship practices. Case reports are a poorly understood component of the biomedical corpus, and the production of anecdotal observations is not confounded by factors associated with disparities in female representation in research publications. Whether female authorship disparities exist in nonresearch publications of clinical information is unknown. OBJECTIVES To examine the authorship of case reports and elucidate factors associated with sex disparity. DESIGN AND SETTING Cross-sectional study of all case reports published by US authors in 2014 and 2015 indexed in PubMed performed from July 2015 to July 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome measure was the proportion of female first authors. The secondary outcome measures were the proportion of female last authors and female authorship representation among different clinical specialties. RESULTS Bibliometric data was abstracted from 20 427 case reports published across 2538 journals. A total of 7252 (36%) and 4825 (25%) case reports had a female first and last author, respectively. In comparison, 44%and 34%of US trainees and physicians, respectively, were female in 2015. Among adult case reports, female authorship was more prevalent in academic environments compared with community settings (34.0%vs 28.2%for female first authors and 23.4%vs 19.7% for female last authors). Across states, the proportions of female first authors and last authors were universally less than the proportions of female trainees and active female physicians, respectively. Female first authorship was associated with larger author teams (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95%CI, 1.01-1.03), an academic affiliation (OR, 1.16; 95%CI, 1.06-1.27), and a female last author (OR, 1.58; 95%CI, 1.47-1.70). Relative to general internal medicine, specialties dominated by male clinicians were less frequently associated with female first authors. Several exceptions displaying a relatively equivalent tendency for male and female first authorship included oncology (OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.81-1.16), ophthalmology (OR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.72-1.05), and radiation oncology (OR, 0.94 95%CI, 0.56-1.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The underrepresentation of women among first and last authors in publications of case reports underscores the pervasiveness of sex disparities in medicine. Collaboration and female mentors may be critical instruments in upsetting longstanding practices associated with sex bias. Not all clinical specialties were associated with lower-than-expected female authorship, and further exploration of specialty-specific norms in publication and mentorship may elucidate specific barriers to female authorship. © 2019 JAMA Network Open.All right reserved.