PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11

Gender disparities in authorship in European cardio-thoracic journals Open PDF
(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025-06-19)
Galeone, Antonella
;
Cleuziou, Julie
;
Perrone, Fabiola
;
Maffei, Irene
;
Fiorinelli, Giorgia
OBJECTIVES The goal was to evaluate gender authorship in 2 cardio-thoracic surgical journals. METHODS We performed a bibliometric analysis of all articles published from 2017 to 2022 in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Interdisciplinary Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. For each article, the gender and academic rank of the first, senior and corresponding authors were verified by Internet search, email contact or use of the application Genderize.io. Articles were categorized based on topic, type and country of origin. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to evaluate gender authorship trend over time. RESULTS A total of 5243 articles were included in the analysis. Women represented 18% of first authors, 7% of senior authors and 13% of corresponding authors; no trend was seen over time. Women represented 16% of first authors and 7% of senior authors in adult cardiac surgery, 23% of first authors and 9% of senior authors in congenital cardiac surgery and 19% of first authors and 8% of senior authors in thoracic surgery. Male first authors were more frequently full professors (17% vs 5%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%), and male senior authors were more frequently full professors (48% vs 31%) and associate professors (16% vs 8%) compared to female senior authors. CONCLUSIONS The proportion of female authors is significantly lower than that of male authors in highest-impact European cardio-thoracic surgery journals, and no significant increase in female authorship has been demonstrated in recent years. Increasing awareness of gender disparities is essential to facilitate equal career opportunities and academic advancement for women in cardio-thoracic surgery.
Sex Disparities in Authorship Order of Cardiology Scientific Publications Open PDF
(2018)
Ouyang, David
;
Sing, David
;
Shah, Sonia
;
Hu, Jiaqi
;
Duvernoy, Claire
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the representation of women in medical training, women continue to be underrepresented in cardiology, academic medicine, and more specifically, in senior positions within academic medicine. Identifying disparities in research productivity and acknowledgment can highlight barriers to female representation in academic cardiology leadership, as well as in academic promotion. METHODS AND RESULTS: This bibliometric analysis included all authors of original research articles between 1980 and 2017 from 3 high-impact cardiology journals ( Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, and European Heart Journal). We identified 71 345 unique authors of 55 085 primary research articles during our study period. Female authors accounted for 33.1% of all authors; however, they represented only 26.7% of first authors and 19.7% of senior authors. Looking at the most prolific authors within this time period, female authors were not well represented, accounting for only 5% of the top 100 authors. Articles with a female senior author had more female middle authors than articles with a male senior author (mean 1.41 versus 0.97, P<0.001) and were more likely to have a female first author (0.37 versus 0.18, P<0.001). There was an increased representation of female authors as first and senior authors compared with the total number of articles with female authors over time ( P<0.001 for trend); however, female senior authorship rates continued to lag first authorship rates. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large database of published manuscripts, we found that female representation in published cardiology research has increased over the past 4 decades. However, women continue to be not well represented as first authors, senior authors, and in the number of publications. When women were senior authors, they published more articles with female first authors and had more female authors. In addition to recruiting more women into the field of cardiology, additional work is needed to identify and address barriers to academic advancement for female physician-scientists.
Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review Open PDF
(2021)
Misra, Vaidehi
;
Safi, Frozan
;
Brewerton, Kathryn A.
;
Wu, Wei
;
Mason, Robin
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate gender differences in authorship of COVID-19 articles in high-impact medical journals compared with other topics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional review. DATA SOURCES: Medline database. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles published from 1 January to 31 December 2020 in the seven leading general medical journals by impact factor. Article types included primary research, reviews, editorials and commentaries. DATA EXTRACTION: Key data elements were whether the study topic was related to COVID-19 and names of the principal and the senior authors. A hierarchical approach was used to determine the likely gender of authors. Logistic regression assessed the association of study characteristics, including COVID-19 status, with authors' likely gender; this was quantified using adjusted ORs (aORs). RESULTS: We included 2252 articles, of which 748 (33.2%) were COVID-19-related and 1504 (66.8%) covered other topics. A likely gender was determined for 2138 (94.9%) principal authors and 1890 (83.9%) senior authors. Men were significantly more likely to be both principal (1364 men; 63.8%) and senior (1332 men; 70.5%) authors. COVID-19-related articles were not associated with the odds of men being principal (aOR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; p=0.89) or senior authors (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; p=0.71) relative to other topics. Articles with men as senior authors were more likely to have men as principal authors (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.83; p<0.001). Men were more likely to author articles reporting original research and those with corresponding authors based outside the USA and Europe. CONCLUSIONS: Women were substantially under-represented as authors among articles in leading medical journals; this was not significantly different for COVID-19-related articles. Study limitations include potential for misclassification bias due to the name-based analysis. Results suggest that barriers to women's authorship in high-impact journals during COVID-19 are not significantly larger than barriers that preceded the pandemic and that are likely to continue beyond it. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020186702.
Who am I, and who are you, and who are we? A Scientometric Analysis of Gender and Geography in HCI
(2022)
McKay, D.
;
Zhang, H.
;
Buchanan, G.
Conference authorship, attendance and presentation is a key measure of quality in the HCI academic, yet we know conferences are not equally accessible for reasons that have nothing to do with quality. In this paper we examine two axes of diversity: gender, and geographic location (of both authors and conferences) and examine how they affect participation at major HCI conferences. Diversity in a group is associated with better outcomes from its work, and HCI has made numerous contributions to increasing representation in other communities. Reflecting on our own situation can produce recommendations for the planning of future HCI conferences, and identify challenges of representation that the HCI community should endeavor to address. © 2022 ACM.
Gender Composition and Trends of Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia Editorial Board Membership: A 33-Year Analysis, 1987-2019 Open PDF
(2019)
Pagel, Paul S.
;
Freed, Julie K.
;
Lien, Cynthia A.
OBJECTIVE: Gender disparities in editorial board composition exist in the vast majority of specialties including anesthesiology. If a similar lack of gender parity exists in cardiothoracic anesthesiology is unknown. The authors examined the gender composition and trends of the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (JCVA) editorial board from the initial year of its publication (1987) to 2019. The authors tested the hypothesis that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history, but women are underrepresented compared with the percentage of those currently practicing academic cardiothoracic anesthesia in the United States (US). DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Internet analysis. PARTICIPANTS: All members of the JCVA editorial board, 1987-2019. INTERVENTIONS: The JCVA editor-in-chief, the associate editor-in-chief, associate editors, section editors, and general editors on the board were extracted from the masthead of a single issue from each calendar year. The years were divided into quartiles (1987-1995, 1996-2003, 2004-2011, and 2012-2019) to collect representative samples of editorial board composition for analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 2,797 members of the JCVA editorial board were positively identified (2,477 [88.6%] men; 310 [11.1%] women); 10 (0.3%) editors could not be identified. Four hundred and fourteen associate and section editors were recorded (men 360 [87.0%], women 54 [13.0%]). There were also 2,353 general editors (2,087 [88.7%] men; 256 [10.9%] women). The total number of JCVA board members, associate and section editors, and general editors progressively increased from 1987 to 1995 to 2012 to 2019. The percentage of women serving on the editorial board increased from 2.5% to 15.8%. Increases in the proportion of female general editors from 2.9% to 16.2% were responsible for this overall increase. A gender gap between the percentage of female first authors (data obtained from a previous publication) and editorial board members was observed in each quartile. Editorial board composition was also different than last author distribution in 1987 to 1995 and 2012 to 2019, but not the other 2 time periods. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that the proportion of women serving on the JCVA editorial board has steadily increased over the journal's history. Nevertheless, women continue to be underrepresented on the JCVA board compared with the percentage of US female academic cardiothoracic anesthesiologists, and gender gaps between first and last authorship and board composition also persist.
Diversity in high-impact psychiatric publishing: gender parity within reach? Open PDF
(2022)
Gmeiner, A.
;
Trimmel, M.
;
Gaglia-Essletzbichler, A.
;
Schrank, B.
;
Süßenbacher-Kessler, S.
Gender parity and authorship diversity are declared goals in the publishing world. This study assessed the progress of authorship gender distribution over a quarter of a century and geographic diversity over the last 15 years in high-impact psychiatric journals. All articles published in 2019 in the American Journal of Psychiatry, the British Journal of Psychiatry, and JAMA Psychiatry were included and compared with data from three points in time starting in 1994. Descriptive statistics were gathered, and chi-square tests were performed. All tests were conducted as two-tailed, and p-values < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Inter-rater reliability was calculated via Cohen’s kappa. In 2019 a total of 473 articles were published. Forty percent of all authors, 42.3% of first authors, and 29.4% of senior authors were female. Counting original research articles only, female first authorship reached 50.4%. In the 25-year period between 1994 and 2019, female first (p <.001), female senior (p <.001), and female overall (p <.001) authorship has increased. In the specific period between 2014 and 2019, overall female senior authorship in all articles (p =.940) as well as first (p =.101) and senior (p =.157) in original research plateaued. In non-original research articles, female first authorship was higher in 2019 compared to 2014 (p =.014), whilst female senior authorship plateaued (p =.154). Geographic diversity was low and did not change over time. Gender parity in the subcategory original research articles was reached for the first time in 2019. Senior female authorship and geographic diversity remain areas of concern that need further investigation and specific interventions. © 2022, The Author(s).
Women's Authorship of Reviews in Ophthalmic Journals over Time Open PDF
(2021)
Gertig, D.
;
Keane, M.C.
;
Matthews, J.M.
;
Williams, K.A.
;
Smith, J.R.
Purpose:To investigate prevalence and trends in women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals over 2 decades.Design:Literature survey.Methods:Total number of authors, and number and gender of first and senior (last-named) authors, were identified in all full reviews published in Prog Retin Eye Res, Surv Ophthalmol, and Curr Opin Ophthalmol for the calendar years 1999, 2009, and 2019. The gender of authors was assigned manually by multiple methods. The subspecialty area of each review was captured by keyword and text search. Country of origin was determined from attributions of first and senior authors.Results:The gender of 841 first and senior authors was assigned unequivocally for 471 articles (96%). The frequency of women's authorship rose significantly over time (1999, 2009, 2019) for both first authors (19%, 32%, 44%; P < 0.001) and senior authors (16%, 19%, 29%; P = 0.018). The number of single-author reviews decreased significantly over time (P < 0.001), as did the proportion of reviews with neither a first nor a senior woman author (P < 0.001). Women's first authorship increased over time for reviews on glaucoma (P < 0.001), while women's senior authorship increased for anterior segment/cataract (P = 0.036). The proportion of reviews with a woman first or senior author did not differ by country of origin (P = 0.887 and P = 0.520, respectively).Conclusions:Women's authorship of articles in ophthalmic review journals increased significantly over the 20-year period, but a gender disparity remained: in 2019, more than 55% of first authors, and more than 70% of senior authors, were men. © 2021 Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology. All rights reserved.
Gender equity in medical publications: Nurses have smashed the glass ceiling Open PDF
(2021)
Feral-Pierssens, A.-L.
;
Avondo, A.
;
Stefano, C.D.
;
Deltour, S.
;
Lapostolle, F.
Introduction Gender equity has become a major concern in many professional fields. The rate of women as authors has to be interpreted according to the rate of women in the related professions. In this perspective, studying nurses' population should be of particular interest since, worldwide, nurses are mostly women. Then, our aim was to study gender disparity in nurses' publications. Methods We selected the three main journals dedicated to nurse publications: International Journal of Nursing Studies, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, and European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing. We included 20 recent consecutive papers from each journal. For each paper, the number of authors, their gender, and rank were recorded. Primary endpoint: Overall rate of women as authors. Secondary endpoints: Rate of women as first, last, second, and third authors. Results Sixty papers including 322 authors were analysed. Overall rate of women authors: 74%. Overall rate of women as first author: 82%. Overall rate of women as last author: 72%. Overall rate of women as second and third authors: Respectively, 80% and 70%. Conclusion Almost three-quarters of the authors in these main scientific journals of nursing studies were female. This rate is lower than the gender rate in the nursing profession. © 2021 SAGE Publications Inc.. All rights reserved.
Gender differences in authorships are not associated with publication bias in an evolutionary journal Open PDF
(Public Library of Science, 2018)
Edwards, Hannah A.
;
Schroeder, Julia
;
Dugdale, Hannah L.
The loss of talented women from senior academic positions has partly resulted from a lower number of published papers and the accompanying reduced visibility of female compared to male scientists. The reasons for these gender-differences in authorship is unclear. One potential reason is a bias in the editorial and review process of scientific journals. We investigated whether patterns of authorship and editorial outcome were biased according to gender and geographic location in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology. Such potential bias may contribute to inequality in the field. We found patterns of gender differences in authorship, but this was unrelated to the editorial decision of whether to publish the manuscript. Female first-authors (the lead role) were six times less likely to be named as the corresponding author than male first-authors, and female first-authors were more likely to be displaced as corresponding authors by female co-authors than were male first-authors. We found an under-representation of female first- and last-authors compared to baseline populations of members of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (which publishes the Journal of Evolutionary Biology) and of Evolutionary Biology faculty at the world top-10 universities for the Life Sciences. Also, manuscripts from Asia were five times more likely to be rejected on the final decision, independent of gender. Overall our results suggest that the peer review processes we investigated at the Journal of Evolutionary Biology are predominately gender-neutral, but not neutral to geographic location. Editorial gender-bias is thus unlikely to be a contributing factor to differences in authorship in this journal.
Bibliometric analysis of gender authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over 30 years of spine 1985 to 2015 Open PDF
(2018)
Brinker, A.R.
;
Liao, J.L.
;
Kraus, K.R.
;
Young, J.
;
Sandelski, M.
Study Design. A bibliometric analysis. Objective. The aim of this article was to study bibliometric changes over the last 30 years of Spine. These trends are important regarding academic publication productivity. Summary of Background Data. Inflation in authorship number and other bibliometric variables has been described in the scientific literature. The issue of author gender is taking on increasing importance, as efforts are being made to close the gender gap. Methods. From 1985 to 2015, 10-year incremental data for several bibliometric variables were collected, including author gender. Standard bivariate statistical analyses were performed. Trends over time were assessed by the Cochran linear trend. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. Inclusion criteria were met for 1566 manuscripts. The majority of the manuscripts were from North America (51.2%), Europe (25.2%), and Asia (20.8%). The number of manuscripts, authors, countries, pages, and references all increased from 1985 to 2015. There was a slight increase in female first authors over time (17.5% to 18.4%, P=0.048). There was no gender change over time for corresponding authors (14.3% to 14.0%, P=0.29). There was an 88% increase in the percentage of female first authors having male corresponding authors (P=0.00004), and a 123% increase in male first authors having female corresponding authors (P=0.0002). The 14% to 18% of female authors in Spine is higher than the ∼5% female membership of the Scoliosis Research Society and North American Spine Society. Conclusion. Manuscripts in Spine over the past 30 years have shown a significant increase in the number of authors, collaborating institutions and countries, printed pages, references, and number of times each manuscript was cited. There has been a mild increase in female first authorship, but none in corresponding authorship. Increases in female authorship will likely require recruitment of more females into the discipline rather than providing females in the discipline with authorship opportunities. Level of Evidence: N/A . Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results