PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Female AuthorshipViewpoints: search.filters.viewpoints.Global

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item type:Publication,
    Spinal neurosurgery: Trends in female authorship contribution over 5-Year publication history Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-10)
    Campanaro, Giovanni
    ;
    Centini, Francesca Romana
    ;
    Sicca, Cecilia
    ;
    Davico, Jazmin
    ;
    Musella, Emanuele
    In the last few years, more efforts have been made to increase gender equity in medical specialties. Nevertheless, spinal neurosurgery continues to be one of the most male-dominated subspecialties in neurosurgery. This bibliometric analysis sought to explore the representation of female authors in major neurosurgical publications between September 2017 and August 2022, with a focus on first and last authorship roles across journals and countries. The paper analyzed 3171 unique publications within a framework of 93 high-impact neurosurgery-related journals. Results showed that female authors were 14,25 % of first authors and 7,88 % of last authors, and that only 2,11 % of articles had both female first and last authors. Country of affiliation and the journal of publication significantly influenced the author's gender representations, with Scandinavian states and certain journals, like Neurocritical Care, showing relatively high percentages of female authorship. Even if there has been minor progress over the recent past, disparities nowadays persist, potentially limiting diversity in perspectives and advancements in this field. These disparities underline the presence and the influence of systemic and cultural factors impeding gender equity, and underscoring the critical need for proactive measures to foster it, including mentorship programs, institutional support, and policies for balanced opportunities. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified inequities in this field, disproportionately impacting female academics due to increased domestic responsibilities without the corresponding implementation of support systems. The significant role of mentorship in improving female representation was also highlighted by this analysis: our data indicated higher collaboration rates between female first and last authors in the field of spinal neurosurgery. To address these challenges, efforts must be made starting during residency, with the aim of targeting systemic barriers and cultural biases. The implementation of inclusive policies, like on-site childcare programs, and fostering international collaboration, might help to reduce these disparities and to ensure that diversity drives innovation in spinal neurosurgery. Such an approach is essential for addressing inequity, which is not merely a matter of fairness but is central to advancing the field. This would ensure that only talent and hard work are what determine success in spinal neurosurgery, which is imperative for the progress of the speciality, enabling diverse perspectives to shape the future of patient care, research, and academic leadership.
  • 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, Marcus
    ;
    Paal, Peter
    BACKGROUND: 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 Differences in Physical Activity and Health-Related Authorships Between 1950 and 2019 Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Kohn, Eduardo Ribes
    ;
    Hallal, Pedro Curi
    ;
    Niño-Cruz, Gloria Isabel
    ;
    Almentero, Julia
    ;
    Pinzón, Diana
    BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to investigate gender differences in authorship in physical activity and health research. METHODS: A bibliometric study including 23,399 articles from 105 countries was conducted to estimate the participation of female researchers in physical activity publications from 1950 to 2019. The frequency of female researchers was analyzed and classified by first and last authors and the overall percentage of female authors by region and country. RESULTS: The proportion of female first authors increased from <10% in the 50s and 80s to 55% in the last decade. On the other hand, the proportion of last authors increased from 8.7% to 41.1% in the same period. Most publications with female researchers were from the United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, the Netherlands, Spain, England, Germany, Sweden, and China. Nine of these countries had over 50% of the articles published by female first authors. However, in all 10 countries, <50% of the articles were published by female last authors. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of female researchers increased over time. However, regional differences exist and should be addressed in gender equity policies. There is a gap in the participation of female researchers as last authors. By actively addressing the gender gap in research, the global society can harness the full potential of all talented individuals, regardless of gender, leading to more inclusive and impactful scientific advancements.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Differences in Hepatology Medical Literature Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Polanco, Nathalie A. Pena
    ;
    McNally, Bridgette B.
    ;
    Levy, Cynthia
    ;
    Carey, Elizabeth J.
    ;
    Palomique, Juvelyn
    BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that gender differences in academic medicine exist. Men frequently have better measures of performance such as number of publications, number of citations, remuneration, and funding. AIMS: To evaluate whether a gender disparity in authorship exists. METHODS: We recorded the gender of first and senior authors of original papers, editorials/reviews from liver-related manuscripts in Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Transplantation, American Journal of Gastroenterology, and Liver Transplantation from January 2014 to 2016. RESULTS: Of 2424 articles reviewed, we excluded 232 (10%) due to inability to determine gender. Among papers analyzed, 72.0% were original and 28.1% reviews/editorials with 65.1% of first authors being male and 34.9% female. Only 20.3% of papers with multiple authors had a female senior author. The proportion of male first and senior authorship between original papers and reviews/editorials was comparable. 72% of original papers had a male as first or senior author, but only 28% females. 71% of review/editorial papers had a male as first or senior author, but only 29% females. When the senior author of an original paper was female, 47.1% of first authors were male and 52.9% female. When the senior author was male, 67.1% of first authors were male and 32.9% female (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant gender difference exists in Hepatology publications. Female authorship mirrors the percentage of female AASLD membership; however, female senior authorship remains disproportionate. In general, funding for male authors is greater. Fewer women are first authors when the senior author is male, highlighting the importance of female mentorship in Hepatology.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender disparities among publications within international sexual medicine urology journals and the impact of blinding in the review process Open PDF 
    (2024)
    Burg, Madeleine L.
    ;
    Kohli, Priya
    ;
    Ha, Nhi
    ;
    Mora, Richard
    ;
    Kurup, Trisha
    BACKGROUND: While female urologists are known to publish at less frequency than their male peers, The Journal of Sexual Medicine was reported to have among the highest growth in female authorship from 2002 to 2020 in urology journals. AIM: We sought to assess the frequency of female authorship in sexual medicine journals worldwide and the factors that affect this, including the blinded/unblinded review process. METHODS: Eleven sexual medicine journals were assessed for geographic location, peer review method, and SCImago Journal Rank citation index (a metric of citation frequency and prestige). Journals were grouped into top, middle, and bottom quartiles based on metric score. Web of Science was used to access the publications' first, second, last, and corresponding authors from the past 5 years. An internet search or Gender-API.com was used to determine the gender identities of authors. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were performed. OUTCOMES: Outcomes included the likelihood of female authorship (first, second, last, and corresponding) based on journal location and ranking, the clustering of female authors, the journal's peer review process, and the frequency of female editorial board members. RESULTS: Overall, 8938 publications were identified. Women represented 30.7%, 31.3%, 21.3%, and 18.7% of the first, second, last, and corresponding authors, respectively; gender was unable to be assessed for 2.6%, 17.2%, 7.3%, and 2.7%. On univariate analysis, journals from North America, in the top quartile, and with a double-blind review process were more likely to have female authors (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, articles were more likely to have a female first author if they had a double-blind peer review process (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.40), a female second author (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 2.26-2.85), or a female corresponding author (OR, 7.80; 95% CI, 6.69-9.10). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Gender-concordant mentoring and universal double-blind manuscript review processes may minimize the impact of gender bias and increase female authorship rates, in turn producing more diverse research. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first study assessing female authorship in sexual medicine journals. Limitations include not assessing every author listed on articles and being unable to determine gender identities for some authors. CONCLUSION: Female authorship rates are higher than reported rates of practicing female urologists but still lower than their male peers. Female authors were more likely to be published in journals with double-blind peer review processes and when publishing with additional female authors.