PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Discipline: search.filters.discipline.SurgerySubject: search.filters.subject.Academic Productivity

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item type:Publication,
    A Comparison of Plastic Surgery Authorship Trends Under Single Versus Double-Blinded Review Open PDF 
    (J Surg Res, 2024)
    S, Subramanian
    ;
    Rs, Maisner
    ;
    N, Patel
    ;
    A, Song
    ;
    L, Yuan
    Abstract Introduction: Research is key to academic advancement in plastic surgery. However, access to publication opportunities may be inequitable as seen in other fields. We compared authorship trends of plastic surgery manuscripts that underwent single-blinded review (SBR) versus double-blinded review (DBR) to identify potential disparities in publication opportunities. Methods: Publications from two plastic surgery journals using SBR and two using DBR from September 2019 to September 2021 were evaluated. Name and institution of the article's first and senior author and journal's editor-in-chief (EIC) were recorded. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact analyses were used to compare author characteristics between SBR and DBR articles. Results: Of 2500 manuscripts, 65.7% underwent SBR and 34.3% underwent DBR. SBR articles had higher percentages of women as first authors (31.9% versus 24.3%, P < 0.001) but lower percentages of first (50.7% versus 71.2%, P < 0.001) and senior (49.6% versus 70.3%, P < 0.001) authors from international institutions. First (26.0% versus 12.9%, P < 0.001) and senior (27.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.007) authors of SBR articles tended to have more plastic surgery National Institutes of Health funding. Journals using SBR tended to have higher rates of authorship by EICs or authors sharing institutions with the EIC (P ≤ 0.005). Conclusions: While associated with greater female first authorship suggesting potential efforts toward gender equity in academia, SBR of plastic surgery articles tends to favor authors from institutions with higher National Institutes of Health funding and disadvantage authors from international or lower-resourced programs. Careful consideration of current peer-review proceedings may make publication opportunities more equitable.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Research productivity and gender disparities: A look at academic plastic surgery Open PDF 
    (2014)
    Paik, A.M.
    ;
    Mady, L.J.
    ;
    Villanueva, N.L.
    ;
    Goljo, E.
    ;
    Svider, P.F.
    Objectives The h-index has utility in examining the contributions of faculty members by quantifying both the amount and the quality of research output and as such is a metric in approximating academic productivity. The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate the relationship between h-index and academic rank in plastic surgery and (2) to describe the current gender representation in academic plastic surgery to assess whether there are any gender disparities in academic productivity. Design The h-index was used to evaluate the research contributions of plastic surgeons from academic departments in the United States. Results There were 426 (84%) men and 79 (16%) women in our sample. Those in higher academic ranks had higher h-index scores (p < 0.0005). There was a significant difference in overall mean h-index by gender, where the mean scores were 9.0 and 6.0 for men and women, respectively (p = 0.0005). When analyzed by academic rank, there was a significant difference in academic productivity between men and women in assistant and associate professor positions (6.4 vs 5.1, respectively; p = 0.04). Conclusions The h-index is able to objectively and reliably quantify academic productivity in plastic surgery. We found that h-indices increased with higher academic rank, and men had overall higher scores than their female colleagues. Adoption of this metric as an adjunct to other objective and subjective measures by promotions committees may provide a more reliable measure of research relevance and academic productivity in academic plastic surgery. © 2014 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. Allrights reserved.