PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://gendermore.unimore.it/handle/123456789/1575
Browse
49 results
Search Results
Item type:Publication, Female Authorship in “Women in STEM” fields: A bibliometric Analysis Open PDF(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2026) ;Swanson, Morgan ELiebl, Andrea LWomen in STEM and STEM-related fields face many issues preventing their sustained inclusion and success, from as early as childhood. Many issues persist into adulthood and careers, including pay disparities, hostile workplace interactions, workload imbalances, and uneven expectations in domestic roles. A growing body of literature seeks to address and analyze female disparities by studying and publishing research related to societal and cultural issues faced by women in STEM. However, the gender of the authors of literature focusing on this type of research also matters as a woman's experience in STEM might provide a different context; equally, male allyship is imperative to furthering gains made in the field. To determine what proportion of authors publishing on female disparity in STEM fields are women, we employed a large-scale bibliometric study to examine the trends in the proportion of three metrics of female authorship on publications related to "Women in STEM" topics; specifically, we analyzed the total female authors, female first authors, and female last authors of 7240 published manuscripts. Literature published between 2000 and 2024 was accessed using a search engine with nine search terms related to issues facing women in STEM, including terms about gender parity, gender inequity, gender attrition, pay gaps, the leaky pipeline, student gender bias, and motherhood in STEM. Overall, the proportion of female authors in any position, including specifically as both first and last author, increased over the period of our study. Our results also indicate a sustained overrepresentation of female authors during the latter portions of our analysis. These results highlight an increase in female authorship on "Women in STEM" literature and demonstrate that female researchers are becoming more central in studying these topics. Although increasing female participation in subjects related to women in STEM is important for perspective, context, and solutions, male inclusion is also important to ensure buy-in in the workplace and allow an equal distribution of labor.Item type:Publication, Trends in Women Authoring Editorials in Cardiothoracic Surgery Journals. Open PDF(2026-05-01) ;Lee, Emily Hyunmin ;Gomes, Zoya ;Kim, Jinny Minji ;Liblik, KieraTravis, NicoleINTRODUCTION: Women have historically been underrepresented in leadership positions and academia in cardiothoracic surgery, creating barriers to career advancement and limiting role models for trainees. While publications are used to measure success in academia, invited articles such as editorials often represent a formal recognition of expertise. The objective of this study was to identify trends in the gender of editorial authors published in cardiothoracic surgery journals. METHODS: Editorials published between 2018 and 2022 across 16 peer-reviewed cardiothoracic surgery journals were analyzed. Author gender was estimated using a validated tool (https://gender-api.com/) with additional verification using available institutional profiles. RESULTS: In total, 806 editorials were published with a total of 1,858 authors (293 women, 16%). Women authors were predominantly from the United States of America (45%) followed by India (9%) and Germany (8%). The percentage of women first authors increased between 2018 and 2022 (P < 0.001); 9% in 2018, 9% in 2019, 17% in 2020, 16% in 2021, and 23% in 2022. A similar trend was observed for women senior authorship (P < 0.0001) (6% in 2018, 9% in 2019, 14% in 2020, 15% in 2021, and 18% in 2022) as well as for editorials with all-women authorship (P < 0.0001), increasing steadily from 9% in 2018 to 20% in 2022. CONCLUSION: Women authorship in editorials published in cardiothoracic surgery journals has steadily increased in recent years. Despite progress, women still make up less than a quarter of first and senior authors, highlighting a critical gap in gender equity in academic leadership that must be urgently addressed.Item type:Publication, An analysis of women’s authorship in five leading anesthesiology journals Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2024-12-20) ;Verleysen, Sören ;Janssens, Sander ;Bauters, Annemie ;De Hert, StefanMoerman, AnneliesPurpose Over the last decade, there has been an increasing interest in gender equity. The present study explored the gender gap in five leading anesthesiology journals worldwide, covering the period from 1980 to 2020. Methods We included all articles published in Anaesthesia, the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, and the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia in the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020, analyzing trends in women’s authorship. We explored its association with variables including study type, subspecialty, continent of the corresponding author, number of authors, and gender of coauthors. Results There was a significant increase in women’s authorship across all positions (first, second, and last) over the years (P < 0.001). Despite this progress, a substantial gender disparity remains evident. Women’s authorship positions were notably associated with the type of study, the subspecialty, and the continent of the corresponding author. There was a strong positive correlation (0.82) between the total number of authors and women’s first authorship position, whereas the correlation was negative (−0.54) for women’s last authorship position. Furthermore, women’s first and last authorship, as well as first and second authorship, were strongly associated, with odds ratios of 2.13 and 1.99, respectively. Conclusion The trajectory of women’s authorship in anesthesiology shows an upward trend, yet women continue to be underrepresented in the field. Particularly noteworthy is the finding that, when a woman is either the first or last author, there is a notable increase in the probability of having a woman as the second or first author, respectively. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for fostering inclusivity and diversity within the discipline.Item type:Publication, Global evolution of female authorships in anesthesiology articles: an affiliation-based, longitudinal, scientometric analysis Open PDF(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2025-10-13) ;Miller, Clemens ;Rosenberger, Johanna ;Sablewski, Armin ;Nemeth, MarcusPaal, PeterBACKGROUND: Although a gender gap in anesthesiology articles has been reported in certain subsets of anesthesiology literature, a comprehensive analysis is still lacking. Our objective was to conduct a scientometric analysis of the evolution of gender equity among anesthesiology authors worldwide, including all available affiliations. We hypothesized that gender inequity has diminished over time, with relevant differences among countries. METHODS: The MEDLINE/PubMed 2024 Baseline Repository was queried for all articles whose authors were affiliated with a department of anesthesiology. Author positions were sequenced into first, co-authors, and senior authors. Gender was inferred using online classification tools (genderize.io and gender-api.com). Geolocation was identified through text mining of the first author's affiliation. The primary endpoint was the evolution of female authors from 1987 to 2023, calculated descriptively and by average annual growth rates. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of female authors in first or senior author position, the influence of senior authors' gender on first authors' gender, geographical differences, and future projections of parity (defined as 50% female authors). RESULTS: Among 374,301 anesthesiology articles and 7,574 journals, the proportion of female authors increased from 13.6% (1987) to 34.3% (2023) with an average annual growth of 0.57% (95%-confidence interval 0.38% - 0.77%). First authors were female in 30.0% and senior authors in 20.7%, with increases from 11.7% (1987) to 36.9% (2023), and from 11.0% (1987) to 25.9% (2023), respectively. Female authors were overall more likely to be first authors when the senior author was also female. In 2023, only Thailand and Portugal had a percentage of female authors over 50%. Tunisia achieved the highest average annual growth rate of female authors at 2.28% (95%-CI 1.51% - 3.06%). Based on the assumption that current trends continue unchanged, overall gender parity is estimated to be achieved by 2050, for first authors by 2043 and for senior authors by 2072. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an increase in recent decades, women are still underrepresented as authors in academic anesthesiology, particularly in leading authorship positions. While relevant differences between countries exist, strategies addressing this gender gap at a country-specific level are needed to promote female authorship in academic anesthesiology.Item type:Publication, Gender trends in authorship of randomized clinical trials in dentistry Open PDF(FapUNIFESP (SciELO), 2025) ;PRADO, Mayara Colpo ;DOTTO, Lara ;AGOSTINI, Bernardo AntônioONOFRE, Rafael SarkisThe aim of the study was to explore female authorship in various aspects of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. A search was performed in PubMed for RCTs, in dentistry, indexed from 12/31/2016 to 12/31/2021. Only studies in English were considered. Data selection and extraction were performed by two authors and the following data collected: year of publication, journal, subject, number and names of authors, and country and gender (Genderize website) of the first 10 authors. Descriptive analyses, graphs, and maps were generated. Poisson regression assessed the influence of continent and year of publication on the presence of women as first or last authors. The results were presented as prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). A total of 844 RCTs and 4,305 authors (2,372 men and 1,662 women) were included. Gender disparity increases as the order of authorship advances. Among first authors, men represent 50.59% and women 44.08%, whereas among last authors, they account for 61.92% and 34.03%, respectively. Analyses showed no association between year of publication and the presence of women as authors. There were fewer women as first authors in Europe (PR: 0.82, 95%CI: 0.68-0.99) and as last authors in Europe and Asia (PR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.53-0.87 and PR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.63-0.99, respectively). The findings highlight a lower presence of female authors in all aspects analyzed in the RCTs, especially in last authorship. Also, there has been no indication of improvement in recent years. Female participation in RCTs is crucial not only for gender equity but also as a means to enhance the quality and relevance of clinical data for decision-making.Item type:Publication, Persistent gender disparity in leading dental publications across 4 decades: an observational study Open PDF(2024) ;Moreno, Laura Barreto ;Franco, Marina Christ ;Karam, Sarah Arangurem ;van de Sande, Françoise HélèneMontagner, Anelise FernandesOBJECTIVES: This observational study assessed the differences in the gender of the first and last authors in the most-cited dental articles over the last 4 decades. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Articles were obtained through an electronic search of the most-cited articles in dentistry by decade (total n = 400 articles). The 100 most-cited studies in each decade (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2019), with any study design, with results in dentistry were eligible. The gender of the first and last authors was determined using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution in general and across the 4 decades was performed with the Chi-square test, and the contribution of variables on the citation rate of articles was performed using linear regression. RESULTS: There were statistical differences between the gender distributions, with a predominance of men in the first (83.8%) and the last (86.8%) positions (P < .001). Over the decades, there was a tendency for an increase in the proportion of women as the last author (P = .002; Chi-square trend Test), with an increase of women from 6% to 22% across the last 4 decades. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the genders for the first author in the last 4 decades (P = .163; Chi-square trend Test). CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that men lead a large percentage of the most-cited articles in dentistry and that this trend has not shown substantial modifications over the last years. Nonetheless, for the position of last authorship, an increase in women's representativity was observed over the last decades.Item type:Publication, Gender trends in authorships and publication impact in Academic Radiology—a 10-year perspective Open PDF(2021) ;Molwitz, I. ;Yamamura, J. ;Ozga, A.-K. ;Wedekind, I.Nguyen, T.-A.Objectives: To analyze the development of publication numbers of female authors in high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals. Methods: In this bibliometric analysis, gender of the first (FA) and senior author (SA) was assigned to all original research articles and reviews, published in 10 high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals in 2007/8 and 2017/18. The adjusted event rate (AER) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) were calculated using mixed logistic and multinomial logistic regression models to assess and compare female publications according to impact factor, journal, author position, and combination. Results: The proportion of female FA and female SA in N = 6979 (2007/2008) and N = 7383 (2017/2018) articles increased to 29.1% and 16.1% in 2017/2018, respectively. While most female authorships were continuously observed in medium-impact journals, the strongest increase occurred for both female FA (AOR 2.0; p <.0001) and SA (AOR 2.1; p <.0001) in low-impact journals. Female SA published significantly more often in a low- (AOR 1.5) or medium- (AOR 1.8) than in a high-ranking journal. Among the high-ranking journals, female FA published most frequently in European Radiology (32.4%; 95% CI [29.3–35.8]; p <.0001), female SA in Investigative Radiology (15.9%; 95% CI [13.7–18.4]; p <.0001). Male same-sex authorships decreased (AOR 0.9), but remained at least twice as common as all-female or mixed authorships. Conclusion: The increase in female authorship is reflected in all impact areas. Female FA and SA increased most in low-ranking journals but are most common in medium-ranking journals. Female SA remain rare, especially in high impact journals. Key Points: • Compared to the proportion of female radiologists worldwide, female senior authors are underrepresented in all impact areas, in particular in high-impact journals. • Among the included high-ranking radiological journals, female first authors and senior authors were strongest represented in European Radiology and Investigative Radiology, while across all impact areas they mostly published in medium-ranking journals. • Female author combinations were more frequent in low- and medium- than in high-ranking journals, whereas male author combinations remained more common than female senior author collaborations in all impact areas. © 2021, The Author(s).Item type:Publication, 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.Item type:Publication, Quantifying gender disparity in physician authorship among commentary articles in three high-impact medical journals: an observational study Open PDF(2020) ;Mamtani, Mira ;Shofer, Frances ;Mudan, Anita ;Khatri, UtshaWalker, RachaelBACKGROUND: Scholarship plays a direct role in career advancement, promotion and authoritative recognition, and women physicians remain under-represented as authors of original research articles. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if women physician authors are similarly under-represented in commentary articles within high-impact journals. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In this observational study, we abstracted and analysed author information (gender and degree) and authorship position from commentary articles published in three high-impact journals between 1 January 2014 and 16 October 2018. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Authorship rate of commentary articles over a 5-year period by gender, degree, authorship position and journal. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare the proportion of men and women physician authorship of commentaries relative to the proportion of men and women physician faculty within academic medicine; and to examine the gender concordance among the last and first authors in articles with more than one author. RESULTS: Of the 2087 articles during the study period, 48% were men physician first authors compared with 17% women physician first authors (p<0.0001). Of the 1477 articles with more than one author, similar distributions were found with regard to last authors: 55% were men physicians compared with only 12% women physicians (p<0.0001). The proportion of women physician first authors increased over time; however, the proportion of women physician last authors remained stagnant. Women coauthored with women in the first and last authorship positions in 9% of articles. In contrast, women coauthored with men in the first and last author positions, respectively, in 55% of articles. CONCLUSIONS: Women physician authors remain under-represented in commentary articles compared with men physician authors in the first and last author positions. Women also coauthored commentaries with other women in far fewer numbers.Item type:Publication, Do Gender-Based Disparities in Authorship and Editorship Exist in Healthcare Simulation Journals? A Bibliometric Review of the Research Open PDF(2021) ;Lydon, Sinéad ;Madden, Caoimhe ;De Bhulbh, Áine ;Maher, SenanByrne, DaraSUMMARY STATEMENT: Publication in peer-reviewed journals, and serving on editorial boards, is considered an indicator of academic productivity and success, and a means of influencing discourse and practice in a field. This bibliometric review explored gender in authorship, and editorship, across the 3 existing English language, nonspecialty specific healthcare simulation journals. In total, 40.4% of publications had women first authors and 34.4% had women senior authors. There were no differences by journal and no apparent changes over time. Poor participation of women on editorial boards (38.1% of editorial board members were women) was observed. The observed level of representation of women as first and senior authors, and on editorial boards, is comparable with other health sciences domains but nonetheless warrants attention and improvement. Future research examining the profile of those working within simulation or evaluating strategies to improve the participation of women within healthcare simulation research and journals would be of interest.