PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Manuscripts

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item type:Publication,
    Reviewing the reviewers: comparison of review quality and reviewer characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology Open PDF 
    (2005)
    Kliewer, Mark A.
    ;
    Freed, Kelly S.
    ;
    DeLong, David M.
    ;
    Pickhardt, Perry J.
    ;
    Provenzale, James M.
    OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine which manuscript reviewer characteristics are most strongly associated with reviewer performance as judged by editors of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At the AJR, manuscript reviews are rated by the journal editors on a subjective scale from 1 (lowest) to 4, on the basis of the value, thoroughness, and punctuality of the critique. We obtained all scores for AJR reviewers and determined the average score for each reviewer. We also sent a questionnaire to 989 reviewers requesting specific information regarding the age, sex, radiology subspecialty, number of years serving as a reviewer, academic rank, and practice type of the reviewer. The demographic profiles were correlated with the average quality score for each reviewer. Statistical analysis included correlation analysis and analysis of variance modeling. Reviewer quality scores were also correlated with the scoring of individual reviews and ultimate disposition of 196 manuscripts sent to the AJR during the same period. RESULTS: Responses to the questionnaire were obtained from 821 reviewers (83.0%), for whom quality scores were available for 714 (87.0%). Correlation analysis shows that the quality score of reviewers strongly correlated with younger age (p = 0.001). A statistically significant correlation between quality score and practice type was seen (p = 0.008), with reviewers from academic institutions receiving higher scores. No significant correlation was found between quality score and sex (p = 0.72), years of reviewing (p = 0.26), academic rank (p = 0.10), or the ultimate disposition of the manuscript (p = 0.40). The quality score of the reviewers showed no variation by subspecialty (p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: The highest-rated AJR reviewers tended to be young and from academic institutions. The quality of peer review did not correlate with the sex, academic rank, or subspecialty of the reviewer.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender trends of urology manuscript authors in the United States: A 35-year progression Open PDF 
    (2012)
    Weiss, D.A.
    ;
    Kovshilovskaya, B.
    ;
    Breyer, B.N.
    Purpose: The presence of women in urology has gradually increased in the last 35 years with an accelerated rate in the last decade. We evaluated manuscript authorship trends by gender. Manuscript authorship is a metric that has been used as a marker of academic productivity. We hypothesized that the number of first and last author publications by women has increased proportionately to the number of women in the field during the last 35 years. Materials and Methods: We performed a bibliometric study to examine authorship gender in The Journal of Urology® and Urology®. We reviewed all original articles published from American institutions in 1974, 1979, 1984, 1989, 1994, 1999, 2004 and 2009. Results: Of the 8,313 articles reviewed 5,461 were from American institutions, including 97.5% for which we determined author gender. There were 767 articles with female authors, including 440 first and 327 last authors. First and last female authorship increased from 2.7% of all authors in 1979 to 26.5% in 2009 (test for trend p <0.001). This authorship rate surpasses the rate of growth of women in urology, which increased from 0.24% in 1975 to 6.2% in 2008. Conclusions: Based on authorship gender analysis women urologists produce manuscripts at a rate that exceeds their number in the field. Findings show that women in urology are productive, active members of the academic community. © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Women's Performance in Conferences and Their Publications: A Critical Analysis Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Samartine, H., Jr.
    ;
    Gracitelli, G.B.
    ;
    Mazzini, L.R.
    ;
    Silva, L.I.
    ;
    Levy, N.G.
    Introduction Gender inequality occurs in all spheres of society, which is no different in the medical field. Abstract presentations in congress are the vanguard of scientific knowledge, an integral part of topic discussion, and, ideally, culminate in the publication of these works as complete manuscripts. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the role played by women in the presentation of scientific works at the Brazilian Society of Coloproctology congress and in the works published from these presentations. Methods The bibliometric evaluation of the presented abstracts in the editions from 2015 to 2018 of the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology was used, along with the works later published from these presentations. Gender identification data was extracted from the authors of the abstracts through their names and research for conference on the Lattes and Google Scholar platforms. The collected data was on the number of female participants and their order of authorship of abstracts and publications, evaluating possible changes when publication occurs. Results A total of 1,336 abstracts were analyzed, with 91.6% of female authors. When publication occurs, women's presence dropped to 75.2% and suffered a change of order in the position of authorship to one of lesser relevance in 38.1%. Conclusion Women's participation occurs in most abstracts. However, this proportion undergoes unfavorable changes when these works are published, either by changing the order of authorship, when women leave main positions and become coauthors, or are removed from the complete manuscript's publication. © 2024. Sociedade Brasileira de Coloproctologia. All rights reserved.