PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 15

Sex differences in altmetric attention scores and traditional impact metrics of top‐cited general surgery literature: Cracks in the ceiling? Open PDF
(Wiley, 2024-06-18)
Waqar, Usama
;
Martins, Russell Seth
;
Siddiqui, Ayra
;
Waheed, Ayesha Akbar
;
Ahmed, Abdullah
Background Sex disparities have previously been identified in surgical academia. This study examines sex differences in the top‐cited contemporary general surgery articles and compares Altimetric Attention Score (AAS) and other impact metrics between male and female corresponding authors (CAs). Methods We conducted a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles published between 2019 and 2021 in each of the top 10 general surgery journals based on the 2021 Journal Impact Factor. Impact metrics included AAS, citation count, and H‐index of the CA. We used multivariable regression analyses to investigate whether the sex of the CA or first author (FA) was independently associated with AAS and citation count. Results Among 1000 articles, 23.1% had female CAs and 27.4% female FAs. Female CA articles had higher AAS (13.0 [2.0–63.0] vs. 8.0 [1.0–28.5]; p < 0.001) and lower H‐indices (24.0 [11.0–45.0] vs. 31.0 [17.0–50.0]; p = 0.015). Although median citation count did not differ by CA sex, articles with Level 1 evidence and a female CA were cited more often (35.5 [24.0–85.0] vs. 25.0 [16.0 vs. 46.0]; p < 0.05). In multivariable regression, female CA articles had higher AAS (OR: 1.002 [95% CI: 1.001–1.004]) and lower H‐index (OR: 0.987 [95% CI: 0.977–0.997]). Conclusion Despite having similar citation counts, articles authored by female CAs exhibit higher AAS scores compared to those authored by their male counterparts. While it is heartening that research authored by female surgeons achieves significant visibility, it remains to be understood how this translates into academic impact and scholarly recognition.
Closing the Gender Gap in Global Surgery: Trends at the Academic Surgical Congress Open PDF
(2021)
Padmanaban, V.
;
DaCosta, A.
;
Tran, A.
;
Kunac, A.
;
Swaroop, M.
Introduction: Female researchers are underrepresented in academic surgery. While they are increasingly producing original research, they lag male researchers in productivity. This disparity is not well understood within the nascent field of global surgery. The following study examines gender parity in global surgery research presented at the Academic Surgical Congress and within subsequent publications. Methods: Abstracts presented at the Academic Surgical Congress (ASC) between 2015 and 2019 in “Global Surgery” sessions were reviewed to obtain title, the first author (FA) and senior author (SA). The authors were classified by gender. The Scopus database was queried by two reviewers for abstracts with corresponding publications, citations, and journal impact factors. Statistical analysis was conducted using chi-square analysis and t-tests where appropriate. Results: Of a total of 6635 abstracts, 218 global surgery abstracts over a 5-year period were identified. Of these abstracts, 96 (44%) had female FAs, while 56 (26%) had female SAs. When comparing gender, female (44%) FAs and male (56%) FAs were equally represented. While SAs were significantly less likely to be female (26% versus 74%, P < 0.0001), female senior authorship increased significantly within the study period. Output with respect to publications, citations, and journal impact factors were equal by gender. Conclusions: This study presents 5 y of gender trends in global surgery scholarly work presented at the ASC. Despite an overall predominance of male senior authors, the paradigm is shifting with a recent trend to gender parity. Male and female authors have equal output and are equally impactful. Findings of gender equity in academic global surgery are encouraging, and further study of other disciplines are warranted. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
A Systematic Review of Gender-Based Differences in Hirsch Index Among Academic Surgeons Open PDF
(2019)
Myers, S.P.
;
Reitz, K.M.
;
Wessel, C.B.
;
Neal, M.D.
;
Corbelli, J.A.
Background: The h-index is a commonly used bibliometric in academic medicine which enumerates the number of publications (h) that have been cited h times. Recent investigations have suggested that gender-based differences in h-index may exist among academic physicians. We systematically reviewed studies of academic surgeons’ h-index, hypothesizing that a significant difference would exist between the h-index of men and women at all academic ranks. Methods: Peer-reviewed journal articles authored by academic surgeons of any subspecialization in the United States between January 1, 2006, and November 20, 2017, were reviewed. We excluded studies of trainees or gender-based differences in funding without mention of h-index. Two reviewers assessed article quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa criteria. Pooled estimates of standard mean differences (SMD) in h-index between genders were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. A subgroup analysis based on the academic rank was performed. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 statistic. Sensitivity analyses determined the effect of study on h-index. Meta-regression identified whether surgical specialty contributed to heterogeneity. Results: Twelve articles comparing h-index between genders were selected from 7950. Men possessed higher h-indices than women (SMD, 0.547; P < 0.001; I 2 = 89.5%). Men exhibited higher h-indices at the assistant rank (SMD, 0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.24; P = 0.039) but not at the associate (SMD, 0.14; 95% CI, −0.06 to 0.33; P = 0.165) or full professor (SMD, 0.12; 95% CI, −0.08 to −0.31; P = 0.25) ranks. Conclusions: The h-index is higher for men than that for women in academic surgery overall but not at individual ranks. Further investigations are necessary to address limitations in h-index and to further characterize the relationship between h-index, gender, and promotion. © 2018 Elsevier Inc.
Women authors of surgical research Open PDF
(2005)
Kurichi, Jibby E.
;
Kelz, Rachel R.
;
Sonnad, Seema S.
HYPOTHESIS: The number of women authors in the surgical literature has increased during the past 20 years. DESIGN: Randomly selected issues of odd-year journals in Archives of Surgery and Annals of Surgery from January 1, 1985, to December 31, 2003, were reviewed. We determined the gender of each author and reported trends in the occurrence of women authors over time. RESULTS: The percentage of women authors has increased over time and parallels the percentage of women faculty in academic surgery positions. A much higher percentage of women authors than men authors are nonphysicians. The trend for increased authorship by women over time was significant in Archives of Surgery. CONCLUSION: Although the number of women first authors is low, their contributions to the field of surgery should be acknowledged, and efforts to provide women with the resources and opportunities to conduct research and publish their findings should be a focus for surgical departments looking to increase their research productivity.
Gender Disparity in the Citation of Surgical Research Open PDF
(2022)
Kane, W.J.
;
Hedrick, T.L.
;
Schroen, A.T.
BACKGROUND: Women surgeons face numerous barriers to career advancement. Inequitable citation of surgical literature may represent a contributing factor to gender disparities in academic surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional analysis of publications from 50 top-ranking surgery journals in 2017 and 2018, as defined by the 2019 InCites Journal Citation Reports. The citation rate of publications by women vs men first authors was compared. Similarly, the citation rate of publications by men vs women last authors was also compared. Adjusted regression analyses of citation rates accounted for the time interval since publication as well as the journal within which the article was published, among other potential confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 19,084 publications from 48 surgery journals with a median (interquartile range) of 8 (4 to 15) citations contributing to a median (interquartile range) Journal Impact Factor of 4.0 (3.4 to 4.6) were analyzed. Compared with man-first author publications, woman-first author publications demonstrated a 9% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.91, p < 0.001). Similarly, compared with publications by man-last authors, woman-last author publications demonstrated a 4% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.96, p = 0.03). These associations persisted after multivariable adjustment for additional confounding factors, however, not on sensitivity analysis of 24 of the highest-ranking journals. CONCLUSIONS: Among top-tier surgical journals, publications by women-first and -last authors were less cited compared with publications by men-first and -last authors, but not among the highest-tier surgical journals. Gender bias may exist in the citation of surgical research, contributing to gender disparities in academic surgery. Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Trends in Female Authorship Over 5-Year Publication History in Neurovascular Surgery Open PDF
(2024)
Jelmoni, Alice J. M.
;
Mascaro, Luca
;
Mariola, Carlotta
;
Conde, Marian Mora
;
Uralov, Daniel
Nel 2023, la disuguaglianza di genere è ancora un problema con cui ogni neurochirurgo donna deve ancora confrontarsi. Le tendenze degli ultimi 10 anni indicano che il numero di neurochirurghi donne è in costante crescita. Tuttavia, le donne rimangono una minoranza in questo campo dove solo il 19% dei professionisti sono donne. 1 , 2 Anche se il numero delle donne in campo neurochirurgico è in costante aumento, siamo ancora lontani da una distribuzione equa. Negli Stati Uniti, le donne rappresentano solo il 6% dei neurochirurghi certificati dall’American Board of Neurological Surgery e l’8% dei neurochirurghi in formazione. Nel 2017, circa il 51% degli studenti di medicina negli Stati Uniti erano donne. 3 Alla fine del 2020, la Società Turca di Neurochirurgia ha dichiarato che il 5,5% degli specialisti in neurochirurgia registrati in Turchia sono donne. 4 Allo stesso modo, la Japan Neurological Society ha dichiarato che solo il 5,6% dei membri sono donne. 5 In Europa, secondo i dati raccolti nei primi anni 2000, la percentuale media di donne che lavorano come medici è pari al 40%, 1 , 2 ma la neurochirurgia non riflette questa tendenza. Non sono disponibili dati sull'attuale e accurata distribuzione di genere degli specializzandi e degli specialisti in neurochirurgia in ciascun paese europeo, se non da parte dei membri delle società ufficiali. 6 , 7 In Italia, sorprendentemente, il 36% dei neurochirurghi sono donne, 2 attualmente la percentuale più alta di neurochirurghi donne in Europa. È importante sottolineare che il tasso di donne residenti è del 55%, 8 anche se le società italiana ed europea nel 2022 riconoscono, rispettivamente, un tasso di iscrizione femminile del 25% e del 23%, a conferma che la percentuale di donne coinvolte in posizioni accademiche è ancora inferiore a quello degli uomini. La rappresentanza delle donne nei comitati editoriali sembra essere ancora più bassa per la chirurgia della colonna vertebrale rispetto ad altre discipline, un aspetto che dovrebbe essere migliorato anche in futuro. 9 , 10 Dai dati sopra citati emerge che, a livello globale, le posizioni di leadership e i titoli accademici sono ancora quasi esclusivamente appannaggio del genere maschile. Consentire ai neurochirurghi donne di impegnarsi nella ricerca e garantire parità di accesso rispetto ai colleghi uomini alle posizioni senior nella leadership del progetto può essere il punto di partenza per raggiungere l’uguaglianza di genere in neurochirurgia. Le autrici donne si stanno affermando sempre più nella letteratura scientifica, a conferma che esistono notevoli tentativi di espandere la componente femminile riguardo a discipline che fino a qualche anno fa erano considerate strettamente maschili. 10 Recentemente è stato dimostrato che la patologia neurochirurgica vascolare presenta il maggior contributo di autrici rispetto alle altre sottospecialità della chirurgia neurologica (neuro-oncologia, spinale, funzionale). 9 , 11 , 12 La ricerca, il finanziamento delle sovvenzioni e le posizioni accademiche dipendono dalla continua attività di pubblicazione scientifica. Aumentare il ruolo di primo piano delle donne neurochirurghi nelle pubblicazioni scientifiche potrebbe col tempo promuovere l’equità nella distribuzione delle posizioni accademiche nel mondo della neurochirurgia. 13 L'obiettivo di questa analisi bibliometrica è quello di ottenere una visione oggettiva sul coinvolgimento delle donne nella letteratura riguardante il campo neurovascolare identificando il numero di articoli in cui il primo autore è donna e di differenziare i risultati per paese e rivista e analizzare l'andamento nel corso gli anni.
The "gender gap" in authorship of academic medical literature--a 35-year perspective Open PDF
(2006)
Jagsi, Reshma
;
Guancial, Elizabeth A.
;
Worobey, Cynthia Cooper
;
Henault, Lori E.
;
Chang, Yuchiao
BACKGROUND: Participation of women in the medical profession has increased during the past four decades, but issues of concern persist regarding disparities between the sexes in academic medicine. Advancement is largely driven by peer-reviewed original research, so we sought to determine the representation of female physician-investigators among the authors of selected publications during the past 35 years. METHODS: Original articles from six prominent medical journals--the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the Annals of Internal Medicine (Ann Intern Med), the Annals of Surgery (Ann Surg), Obstetrics & Gynecology (Obstet Gynecol), and the Journal of Pediatrics (J Pediatr)--were categorized according to the sex of both the first and the senior (last listed) author. Sex was also determined for the authors of guest editorials in NEJM and JAMA. Data were collected for the years 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2004. The analysis was restricted to authors from U.S. institutions holding M.D. degrees. RESULTS: The sex was determined for 98.5 percent of the 7249 U.S. authors of original research with M.D. degrees. The proportion of first authors who were women increased from 5.9 percent in 1970 to 29.3 percent in 2004 (P<0.001), and the proportion of senior authors who were women increased from 3.7 percent to 19.3 percent (P<0.001) during the same period. The proportion of authors who were women increased most sharply in Obstet Gynecol (from 6.7 percent of first authors and 6.8 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 40.7 percent of first authors and 28.0 percent of senior authors in 2004) and J Pediatr (from 15.0 percent of first authors and 4.3 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 38.9 percent of first authors and 38.0 percent of senior authors in 2004) and remained low in Ann Surg (from 2.3 percent of first authors and 0.7 percent of senior authors in 1970 to 16.7 percent of first authors and 6.7 percent of senior authors in 2004). In 2004, 11.4 percent of the authors of guest editorials in NEJM and 18.8 percent of the authors of guest editorials in JAMA were women. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past four decades, the proportion of women among both first and senior physician-authors of original research in the United States has significantly increased. Nevertheless, women still compose a minority of the authors of original research and guest editorials in the journals studied.
Association of Author Gender With Sex Bias in Surgical Research Open PDF
(2018)
Xiao, Nicholas
;
Mansukhani, Neel A.
;
Mendes de Oliveira, Diego F.
;
Kibbe, Melina R.
Importance: Previous studies demonstrate sex bias in surgical research. Female participants and investigators are underrepresented in surgical scientific research. Objectives: To describe the distribution of male and female authors in 5 general-interest surgery journals, assess the association of author gender with sex bias, and explore whether investigators benefit from performing sex-inclusion research. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this bibliometric analysis, data were abstracted from 1921 original, peer-reviewed articles published from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012, in Annals of Surgery, American Journal of Surgery, JAMA Surgery, The Journal of Surgical Research, and Surgery. Excluded articles pertained to a sex-specific disease or did not report the number of study participants. An additional 119 articles contained gender-ambiguous author names and were omitted. Data were analyzed from April to June 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Male and female first and senior authors, number of female and male participants in each study, surgical specialty, and number of citations received per article. Results: Of the 3604 authors of 1802 articles included in this study, 2791 first and senior authors (77.4%) were male and 813 (22.6%) were female. The prevalence of male and female authors was consistent across all 5 journals and among clinical and basic science research. Articles by female authors included a higher median number of female study participants compared with their male counterparts (27.5 vs 16.0; P = .01), but sex matched the inclusion of participants less frequently (36% vs 45%; P = .001). No sex-based differences occurred between male and female authors in reporting, statistical analysis, and discussion of the data or in the number of citations received. Compared with studies that did not report, analyze, or discuss data by sex, studies that performed sex-specific data reporting yielded a mean of 2.8 more citations (95% CI, 1.2-4.4; P = .001); those that performed statistical analysis, a mean of 3.5 more citations (95% CI, 1.8-5.1; P = .001); and those that discussed the data, a mean of 2.6 more citations (95% CI, 0.7-4.5; P = .001). Articles with a higher percentage of sex matching of participants also received more citations, with an increase of 1 citation per 4.8% (95% CI, 2.0%-7.7%; P = .001) increase in percentage of sex matching. Conclusions and Relevance: Sex bias in surgical research is prevalent among male and female authors; however, female authors included proportionally more female participants in their studies compared with male authors. Notably, studies that addressed sex bias were rewarded by the scientific community with increased citations of their published work.
Increases in female academic productivity and female mentorship highlight sustained progress in previously identified neurosurgical gender disparities Open PDF
(2021)
Taha, Birra
;
Sadda, Praneeth
;
Winston, Graham
;
Odigie, Eseosa
;
Londono, Cristina
OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis was performed to understand disparities in the representation of female authorship within the neurosurgical literature and implications for career advancement of women in neurosurgery. METHODS: Author names for articles published in 16 of the top neurosurgical journals from 2002 to 2019 were obtained from MEDLINE. The gender of each author was determined using automated prediction methods. Publication trends were compared over time and across subdisciplines. Female authorship was also compared to the proportionate composition of women in the field over time. RESULTS: The metadata obtained from 16 major neurosurgical journals yielded 66,546 research articles. Gender was successfully determined for 96% (127,809/133,578) of first and senior authors, while the remainder (3.9%) were unable to be determined through prediction methods. Across all years, 13.3% (8826) of articles had female first authorship and 9.1% (6073) had female senior authorship. Female first authorship increased significantly over time from 5.8% in 2002 to 17.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Female senior authorship also increased significantly over time, from 5.5% in 2002 to 12.0% in 2019 (p < 0.001). The journals with the highest proportions of female first authors and senior authors were the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics (33.5%) and the Asian Journal of Neurosurgery (23.8%), respectively. Operative Neurosurgery had the lowest fraction of female first (12.4%) and senior (4.7%) authors. There was a significant difference between the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical trainees and the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical first (p < 0.001) and senior (p < 0.001) authors. Articles were also more likely to have a female first author if the senior author of the article was female (OR 2.69, CI 2.52-2.86; p < 0.001). From 1944 to 2019, the Journal of Neurosurgery showed a steady increase in female first and senior authorship, with a plateau beginning in the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: Large meta-analysis techniques have the potential to effectively leverage large amounts of bibliometric data to quantify the representation of female authorship in the neurosurgical literature. The proportion of female authors in major neurosurgical journals has steadily increased. However, the rate of increase in female senior authorship has lagged behind the rate of increase in first authorship, indicating a disparity in academic advancement in women in neurosurgery.
Gender analysis of the top classic papers in otolaryngology head and neck surgery Open PDF
(2022)
Go, B.
;
Suresh, N.
;
Go, C.
;
Chorath, K.
;
Mirza, N.
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and analyze the gender breakdown of first authorship contributing to the most-cited papers in the field of otolaryngology, with a goal of identifying trends in gender representation in publishing. Methods: The top 150 most-cited papers were identified using the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information. Among the first authors, gender, h-index, percentage of first, last, and corresponding authorship positions, total publications, and citations were analyzed. Results: The majority of papers were in the English language, from the United States, of clinical nature, and on otologic topics. Eighty-one percent of papers (n = 122) had men who were first authors, although there was no difference in h-index score, authorship position, number of publications, citations, and average citations/year between men and women first authors. Upon subgroup analysis by decade (1950s–2010s), there was no difference in the number of articles by women first authors (P = 0.11); however, there was a statistically significant increase in the percentage of women authors (P = 0.001) in papers published later compared to those published earlier. Conclusions: While a promising number of women otolaryngologists are publishing high-powered articles, future initiatives to promote academic inclusivity of women should be considered. © 2022 The Authors. World Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Chinese Medical Association.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results