PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Medical Publications

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Item type:Publication,
    Analysis of gender in the authorship of the scientific publications of the Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española in the last decade Open PDF 
    (2021)
    González-Torres, Lucía
    ;
    Mayo-Yáñez, Miguel
    Introduction In recent decades, progress has been made in tackling inequality between men and women, encouraging publications that analyse and provide recommendations to eliminate this issue. The aim of this study is to analyse the gender differences in the authorship of the studies published in the journal Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española. Methods A cross-sectional study of issues published between January 2010 and December 2019, including number of authors (total, men and women), type and year of publication, institution and country (first, second and last author), and area of specialisation. Women's participation was calculated based on female/male ratio, trend and associated factors. Results A total of 615 articles with 2,841 authors (1,017 women and 1,824 men) from Spain were collected. A total of 244 (39.7%) women and 371 (60.3%) men were listed as first authors (p = .879), 245 (39.84%) women and 370 (60.16%) men as second authors (p = .919), and 137 (22.28%) women and 478 (77.72%) men as final signatories (p < .000). All the ratios calculated were below the recommended figures. Discussion The participation of female authors in the scientific production of Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española is acceptable, following a similar distribution to the current number of female ENT specialists. Further efforts are needed to increase the number of final signatories and to change the decreasing trend recorded over the last decade. Resumen Introducción En las últimas décadas se ha avanzado hacia la igualdad entre hombres y mujeres, incentivando publicaciones que analizan esta realidad y aportan recomendaciones para conseguir eliminarla. El objetivo de este estudio es analizar las diferencias de género en la autoría de los estudios publicados en el Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española. Métodos Estudio transversal de los números publicados entre enero de 2010 y diciembre 2019, incluyendo: número de autores (total, hombres y mujeres), tipo y año de publicación, institución y país (primero, segundo y último autor), y área de especialización. La participación de la mujer fue calculada en base a la ratio mujer/hombre, tendencia y factores asociados. Resultados Se recogieron 615 artículos con 2.841 autores (1.017 mujeres y 1.824 hombres) de España. Un total de 244 (39,7%) mujeres y 371 (60,3%) hombres figuraban como primeros autores (p = 0,879), 245 (39,84%) mujeres y 370 (60,16%) hombres como segundos autores (p = 0,919), y 137 (22,28%) mujeres y 478 (77,72%) hombres como últimos firmantes (p < 0,000). Todas las ratios calculadas se encontraron por debajo de las cifras recomendadas. Discusión La participación de autoras en la producción científica de Acta Otorrinolaringológica Española es aceptable, siguiendo una distribución similar al número de otorrinolaringólogas mujeres existente en la actualidad. Son necesarios más esfuerzos para aumentar el número de últimas firmantes y cambiar la tendencia a la disminución registrada en la última década.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender inequalities in authorship of the main Spanish medical journals in 2017 Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Tornero Patricio, S.
    ;
    Alonso Rueda, I.O.
    ;
    García Gozalbes, J.
    ;
    Domínguez Domínguez, J.A.
    ;
    Charris-Castro, L.
    Introduction: Some studies have shown a lower female participation in scientific publications. The objective of this study is to analyse the gender inequalities in the main Spanish journals of medical publications. Material and method: Cross-sectional study of the main Spanish medical journals classified by SCImago Journal & Country Ranking (n = 24) and their publications (n = 3.375), during the year 2017. Women/men ratio in authorship was calculated for all journals and types of papers. Bivariate analyses were developed with the type of article as the dependent variable, and gender, institution, and country of the first and last authors as the independent variables. Logistic regression models were performed to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of the types of papers according to authorship gender, institution, and country. The statistical program used was R. Results: The total number of authors was 16,252 (44.2% women, 53.9% men, and 1.9% non-identified gender). Women represented 46% of the first authors and 33.5% of the last ones. Women were the first authors of Editorials less often than men (aOR 0.39; 95% CI 0.30-0.51), but more often in Originals (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.33-1.80). Women were the last authors with less frequency in all types of papers, especially in Editorials (aOR 0.50; 95% CI 0.35-0.70). The women/men ratio in authorship was less than 0.80 in 10 of 26 journals analysed (41.7%). Conclusions: These results show the gender inequalities in the authorship of the main Spanish medical journals in 2017, especially as first authors and Editorials. © 2020
  • Item type:Publication,
    Contribution of women authors in French medical journals from 1983 to 2019 Open PDF 
    (2023)
    Schohn, A.
    ;
    Wathelet, M.
    ;
    Noël, G.
    Purpose: Despite the feminization of the medical profession, the academic world remains largely male-dominated. Several studies conducted in the English-speaking world have shown that women are published less than men. Our goal is to define the evolution of the role of women in five French medical journals. Materials and methods: The articles from five French journals (Revue du Praticien, Bulletin du Cancer, Exercer, Presse Médicale, Cancer/Radiothérapie) published in February between 1983 and 2019 were included. We selected twelve years from that period of time. The analysis was completed using Cochran-Armitage tests with a significance level of < 0,05. Among the authors, 4397 were included in total and we were able to determine the gender of 4309 of them. Results: The percentage of female authors went from 16% in 1983 to 36.4% in 2019 (p < 0.001). This rise is more significant for those specializing in surgery than for those specializing in medicine, with a percentage going from 14% to 38.5% (p < 0.001) against 16.8% to 35.4% (p < 0.001) respectively. In 2019, women still only represent 30.2% of the last authors, 27.6% of editorial authors and 30.6% of corresponding authors. Conclusion: Our study underlines a significant increase in the number of female authors and highlights that their position as authors remains on the margins of the most prestigious authorial positions. While we can celebrate this increase, we nevertheless notice that there are fewer female authors than female practitioners. © 2022 Société française de radiothérapie oncologique (SFRO)
  • Item type:Publication,
    Publication performance of women compared to men in German cardiology Open PDF 
    (2015)
    Böhm, M.
    ;
    Papoutsis, K.
    ;
    Gottwik, M.
    ;
    Ukena, C.
    Background presentations at scientific congresses are a preparation for publication in peer reviewed journals. The present study aimed to investigate the prediction of abstract acceptance of peer reviewed publications focusing on the difference between male and female first authors. Methods We evaluated 8411 abstracts submitted to the German Cardiac Society by 2090 females and 6321 male scientists. Abstract grading (3 to 9 reviewers, blinded on a 5-point scale) separated those accepted and rejected followed by a bibliometric analysis of Medline publications from 2006 to 2012. Results While rating of abstracts was not different between males and females (p = 0.475), publication rate of females was lower compared to males (17.5% vs 24.4 ≥ %, p < 0.001). Female authors achieved a higher impact factor in their publications (5.1 ± 0.2 vs 4.4 ± 0.1, p = 0.0003) and were more often listed on papers in highly ranked journals (impact factor ≥ 5) than males. Although, more accepted abstracts than rejected ones were published in high rank journals, a considerable number of papers were generated from rejected abstracts (22%). Conclusions Female cardiologists had a better publication success than males concerning high rank peer reviewed publications. Acceptance in blinded abstract evaluation often detects work published later, while rejected contributions still might represent high quality work suitable for publication in peer reviewed journals. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.