PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 92

Trends in Women Authoring Editorials in Cardiothoracic Surgery Journals. Open PDF
(2026-05-01)
Lee, Emily Hyunmin
;
Gomes, Zoya
;
Kim, Jinny Minji
;
Liblik, Kiera
;
Travis, Nicole
INTRODUCTION: 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.
Gender bias in guidelines and recommendations on rheumatology in Argentina: A bibliometric analysis Open PDF
(Elsevier BV, 2026-05)
Navarro, Belén
;
Sequeira, Gabriel
;
Kerzberg, Eduardo
Abstract Introduction Women constitute the majority in Argentine rheumatology research, but their participation in rheumatology guidelines and recommendations (RGRs) has not been evaluated. Objective To analyze women's representation in RGRs published between 2010 and 2024 that included at least one Argentine rheumatologist. Methods Cross-sectional bibliometric study of rheumatology guidelines and recommendations published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2024, including at least one rheumatologist affiliated with an Argentine center. Publications were identified through searches in PubMed, the Revista Argentina de Reumatología, and Google Scholar using predefined affiliation-based keywords. The main study variables were author gender, first and corresponding authorship, guideline classification national (NAC) or international (INT), and declared conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. Descriptive analyses were performed, and group comparisons were conducted using the Mann–Whitney U test and chi-square test. Results Eighty-seven RGRs were analyzed (79% INT), with a median publication year of 2021. Of 526 authors, 274 (52%) were women. In NAC RGRs, 57% of authors were women versus 43% in INT (p = 0.003). Among 25 first authors based in Argentina, 11 (44%) were women; among 12 corresponding authors, 5 (42%) were women. COIs were reported in 24 RGRs, totaling 59 declarations, 37 (63%) from men. Conclusions Although women are the majority among Argentine rheumatology researchers, their representation decreases in international publications and leadership roles. Conflicts of interest show a gender bias favoring men. Resumen Introducción Las mujeres son mayoría en la investigación reumatológica argentina, pero no se ha evaluado su participación en las guías y recomendaciones en reumatología (GRR). Objetivo Analizar la representación femenina en las GRR publicadas entre 2010 y 2024 que incluyeran al menos un/a reumatólogo/a con afiliación en Argentina (ARG). Métodos Estudio bibliométrico transversal de GRR en reumatología publicadas entre el 1 de enero de 2010 y el 31 de diciembre de 2024 que incluyeron al menos un/a reumatólogo/a ARG. Las publicaciones fueron identificadas mediante búsqueda en PubMed, Revista Argentina de Reumatología y Google Scholar utilizando combinaciones predefinidas en el campo de afiliación. Se registraron el género de los autores, la autoría principal y de correspondencia, la clasificación de la guía como nacional (NAC) o internacional (INT), y los conflictos de interés (COI) declarados. Se realizaron análisis descriptivos y comparativos (Mann–Whitney U y chi-cuadrado). Resultados Se analizaron 87 GRR (79% INT), con mediana de publicación en 2021. De 526 autores, 274 (52%) fueron mujeres. En las GRR NAC, el 57% de los autores fueron mujeres vs 43% en las INT (p = 0,003). Entre los primeros autores ARG, el 44% fueron mujeres; entre los autores de correspondencia, el 42%. Se declararon COI en 24 GRR (59 declaraciones), 63% correspondientes a hombres. Conclusiones La participación femenina es mayoritaria en las GRR NAC, menor en las INT y en los roles de liderazgo. Los COI muestran un sesgo de género favorable a los hombres.
Gender- and Sex-equitable Submission Guidelines in Emergency Medicine Journals Are Associated with Enhanced Publication Metrics Open PDF
(California Digital Library (CDL), 2026-01-16)
Manes, Akash
;
Lall, Michelle D.
;
Knight, Starr
;
Raja, Ali S.
;
Khosa, Faisal
Introduction: Gender and sex equity-promoting (GSEP) clinical research is essential to improving diversity and inclusivity in medicine. In this study we aimed to compare journal impact metrics in emergency medicine (EM) between journals that integrated gender- and sex-based considerations and those that did not. Methods: We searched the 2023 Journal Citations Report (Clarivate Analytics) for EM journals. Submission guidelines of each EM journal were examined according to the SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) guidelines and stratified as conforming or non-conforming depending on whether at least one SAGER criterion was met. Our primary outcome measure was the journal impact factor. Secondary outcome measures included other citation and influence metrics: total citations; 5-year journal impact factor; journal citation indicator; article influence score, normalized Eigenfactor score; citable items; total articles; and immediacy index. Results: Based on our classification system informed by the SAGER criteria, most journals (66%, 31/47) were classified as non-compliant. The EM journals that conformed to the sex and gender equity guidelines were rated higher than non-conforming journals across all studied journal metrics. We found that conforming journals had a significantly higher median difference (MD) than non-conforming EM journals in total citations (MD 1,586; GSEP: 3,599 vs non-GSEP: 901); 2023 2-year journal impact factor (MD 0.8; 2.3 vs 1.4); 5-year journal impact factor (MD 0.7; 2.5 vs 1.9); article influence score (MD 0.26; 0.76 vs 0.47); normalized Eigenfactor score (MD 0.79; 1.06 vs 0.26); citable items (MD 37; 103 vs 56), and total articles (MD 41; 87 vs 42). All differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Using criteria informed by the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines, most EM journals (66%) were classified as non-conforming to these guidelines. This indicates a significant gap in the integration of gender- and sex-based considerations in EM research publication practices.
Gender shapes the relationship between productivity and journal prestige in science Open PDF
(Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2026-03-27)
Ribeiro, Vítor H.
;
Sunahara, Andre S.
;
Shahtahmassebi, Golnaz
;
Perc, Matjaž
;
Ribeiro, Haroldo V.
Gender disparities in academia manifest and persist in various aspects of the scientific enterprise, yet their influence on the interplay between research productivity and journal prestige remains underexplored. Here we analyze the academic trajectories of over 6000 elite Brazilian researchers by jointly tracking their annual productivity and the average prestige of the journals in which they publish. By projecting individual career years onto a standardized productivity-prestige plane and applying Bayesian hierarchical modeling, we find that male researchers are more likely to follow productivity-oriented trajectories and are markedly overrepresented in the hyperprolific region of this plane. Female peers, in contrast, more often occupy regions that prioritize journal prestige over publication quantity. Although male researchers publish more throughout their careers, their female counterparts achieve comparable or higher average journal prestige, particularly in later career stages and among outlier individuals. Male researchers also exhibit greater temporal persistence in their productivity and impact levels and are especially averse to simultaneously changing both metrics compared to their female peers. Among non-outliers, productivity and career age have a negative overall impact on the average journal prestige of researchers of both genders, with slightly stronger effects observed among female researchers; however, these patterns vary across disciplines, highlighting the complexity and heterogeneity of academic careers.
Gender differences in submission behavior exacerbate publication disparities in elite journals Open PDF
(eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd, 2026-02-20)
Ni, Chaoqun
;
Basson, Isabel
;
Badia, Giovanna
;
Tufenkji, Nathalie
;
Sugimoto, Cassidy R
Women are particularly underrepresented as leading authors of papers in journals of the highest impact factor, with substantial consequences for their careers. While a large body of research has focused on the outcome and the process of peer review, fewer articles have explicitly focused on gendered submission behavior and the explanations for these differences. In our study of nearly 5000 active authors, we find that women are less likely to report having submitted papers to journals of the highest impact (e.g., Science, Nature, or PNAS) and to submit fewer manuscripts, on average, than men when they do submit. Women were more likely to indicate that they did not submit their papers (in general and their subsequently most cited papers) to high-impact journals because they were advised not to. In the aggregate, no statistically significant difference was observed between men and women in how they rated the quality of their work. Nevertheless, regardless of discipline, women were more likely than men to indicate that their 'work was not ground-breaking or sufficiently novel' as a rationale for not submitting to one of the listed prestigious journals. Men were more likely than women to indicate that the 'work would fit better in a more specialized journal'. We discuss the implications of these findings and interventions that can serve to mitigate the disparities caused by gendered differences in submission behavior.
Trends of female authorship in speech-language pathology publications over the last decade Open PDF
(BMJ, 2025-07)
Ganesan, Sandhya
;
Ferraro, Tatiana
;
Smaoui, Sana
;
Zitoun, Leena
;
Pramanik, Lara
Objectives The purpose of this study was to analyse the speech-language pathology (SLP) literature from 2012 to 2022 and evaluate authorship trends and factors associated with gender disparities. Design and outcome measures Authorship across journals published by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) was evaluated. Outcomes collected from each article included the gender of the first and senior authors, author department affiliations, study type, reported funding source and the country of origin. Three sets of linear regression models were explored to determine the probability of male first authorship, of male senior authorship, and of a study being funded. Results A total of 2754 articles were identified for inclusion. The majority of the literature was authored by females, with 77% of first authors and 68% of senior authors being female. Studies with a male senior author were shown to be 4.05–4.67 times more likely to have a male first author than with a female senior author. Male senior authors were over-represented relative to their proportion of ASHA membership compared with female senior authors. Male authorship was associated with certain subtopics, including voice, stuttering and motor speech. Funding probability decreased for all authors regardless of gender between 2012 and 2022. Conclusions Implicit gender bias and societal gender stereotypes lead to a greater number of women in the field of SLP; the same biases and stereotypes often limit the research productivity and academic leadership potential of women in the field. Addressing these biases and stereotypes is vital to move towards gender equity in the field.
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.
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 Hélène
;
Montagner, Anelise Fernandes
OBJECTIVES: 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.
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.
Trends in Authorship in Anesthesiology Journals Open PDF
(2019)
Miller, Joanna
;
Chuba, Emuejevoke
;
Deiner, Stacie
;
DeMaria, Samuel
;
Katz, Daniel
Despite increasing representation in medicine, women continue to be a minority in academic practice and leadership, especially in male-dominated fields like anesthesiology. Differences in compensation and participation in leadership may represent barriers to career advancement for women in anesthesiology. Key factors for promotion in academic anesthesiology are research, funding, and publication. As such, designation as a first or senior author on a publication in a professional journal may act as currency for promotion. Here, we examine the prevalence of female first and senior authorship of original research articles published in Anesthesiology and Anesthesia & Analgesia during the years 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017. Other manuscript characteristics assessed in relation to author gender included study type, subspecialty topic, and total number of authors. Of 2600 manuscripts studied, analysis of authorship by year demonstrated an increase in female first authorship, senior authorship, and editorial board membership by 10%, 9%, and 6%, respectively. Women made up a higher percentage of first authors on manuscripts with female senior authors. More nonexperimental studies had female senior authors than experimental studies. Female first authors had greater representation in the subspecialties of neuroanesthesia, obstetrical anesthesia, pain management, and pediatric anesthesia. Median number of authors was unrelated to senior author gender. This study shows increasing female first and senior authorship, as well as editorial board composition in 2 popular, high-impact anesthesiology journals. Recognizing gender-based trends in publications is important to develop strategies for the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in anesthesiology.

PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

Browse

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results