PUBBLICAZIONE/PUBLICATION

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

Browse

Filters

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.Research

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 59
  • Item type:Publication,
    Sex differences in altmetric attention scores and traditional impact metrics of top‐cited general surgery literature: Cracks in the ceiling? Open PDF 
    (Wiley, 2024-06-18)
    Waqar, Usama
    ;
    Martins, Russell Seth
    ;
    Siddiqui, Ayra
    ;
    Waheed, Ayesha Akbar
    ;
    Ahmed, Abdullah
    Background Sex disparities have previously been identified in surgical academia. This study examines sex differences in the top‐cited contemporary general surgery articles and compares Altimetric Attention Score (AAS) and other impact metrics between male and female corresponding authors (CAs). Methods We conducted a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles published between 2019 and 2021 in each of the top 10 general surgery journals based on the 2021 Journal Impact Factor. Impact metrics included AAS, citation count, and H‐index of the CA. We used multivariable regression analyses to investigate whether the sex of the CA or first author (FA) was independently associated with AAS and citation count. Results Among 1000 articles, 23.1% had female CAs and 27.4% female FAs. Female CA articles had higher AAS (13.0 [2.0–63.0] vs. 8.0 [1.0–28.5]; p < 0.001) and lower H‐indices (24.0 [11.0–45.0] vs. 31.0 [17.0–50.0]; p = 0.015). Although median citation count did not differ by CA sex, articles with Level 1 evidence and a female CA were cited more often (35.5 [24.0–85.0] vs. 25.0 [16.0 vs. 46.0]; p < 0.05). In multivariable regression, female CA articles had higher AAS (OR: 1.002 [95% CI: 1.001–1.004]) and lower H‐index (OR: 0.987 [95% CI: 0.977–0.997]). Conclusion Despite having similar citation counts, articles authored by female CAs exhibit higher AAS scores compared to those authored by their male counterparts. While it is heartening that research authored by female surgeons achieves significant visibility, it remains to be understood how this translates into academic impact and scholarly recognition.
  • Item type:Publication,
    The Role of Women in the Top 100 Most Influential Arthroplasty Publications: A Bibliometric Analysis Open PDF 
    (Elsevier BV, 2025-04)
    Payne, Camryn S.
    ;
    Boddu, Sayi P.
    ;
    Beckett, Nathan C.
    ;
    Cancio-Bello, Alexandra M.
    ;
    Bingham, Joshua S.
    BACKGROUND: Women account for 2% of arthroplasty surgeons in the United States. It is important to understand how women contribute to the literature in the field of arthroplasty currently. We compared the proportion of first, middle, and senior authorship by women in the top 100 most-cited hip and knee arthroplasty studies published between 2010 and 2024 to the national proportion of women hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons and evaluated the H-indices of authors by gender. METHODS: The literature search was performed on the Clarivate Analytics Web of Knowledge database. Once 100 studies met the inclusion criteria, those that did not originate from the United States or whose author first names were not included were excluded. The author's gender was determined by first name. The Scopus author database was used to determine the H-index for first and senior authors. RESULTS: There were 91 papers that met the criteria. These papers were produced by a total of 458 authors, of whom 13.7% were women. There were six (7.4%) of 81 unique first authors, 50 (15.8%) of 315 middle authors, and seven (11.3%) of 62 unique senior authors who were women. Women had lower average H-indices than men. CONCLUSIONS: Women's contributions to the most influential hip and knee arthroplasty articles are much higher than predicted given their underrepresentation in the field, indicating the substantial value they add to leading arthroplasty research. Despite this, disparities exist for women in authorship rank and H-index. These disparities may be mitigated by intentionally fostering greater support for women throughout all phases of orthopaedic surgery training to improve opportunities for impactful research and career advancement.
  • Item type:Publication,
    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.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Is the gender gap closing in otolaryngology subspecialties? An analysis of research productivity Open PDF 
    (2020)
    Okafor, S.
    ;
    Tibbetts, K.
    ;
    Shah, G.
    ;
    Tillman, B.
    ;
    Agan, A.
    Objective: The proportion of women specializing in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery (Oto–HNS) and seeking fellowship training has steadily increased over the last several years. In academic Oto–HNS, gender differences exist in research productivity, scholarly impact, and funding. This study aims to evaluate gender differences in academic productivity between otolaryngologists in early, mid-, and later careers stages and within various subspecialties. Methods: Departmental websites for all Oto–HNS residency programs were accessed, and data including gender, academic rank, and fellowship training/subspecialty field was collected. Bibliometric data including h-index, publication years, number of citations, documents, and coauthors was obtained from the Scopus database. Career groups were defined as early (1–5 years), mid- (6–15 years), and later (16+ years). Continuous data was compared using the t test. Results: Data was collected on 1,754 academic otolaryngologists (412 women, 1,342 men). Overall, men exhibited significantly higher h-indices, number of documents, citations, and coauthors and actively published for more years compared to women (P < 0.0001 for all variables). Similar trends persisted across all subspecialties. When authors were broken down into career groups, women and men showed similar research productivity across all career groups in the subspecialties of otology, facial plastics, and rhinology; however, in head and neck, laryngology, and pediatrics, women continued to lag behind men. Conclusion: This study suggests that female otolaryngologists within certain subspecialties are keeping pace with their male counterparts in publication productivity in the early career time frame. This represents a change from prior studies which have shown women to be less productive in the early career period. Level of Evidence: NA. Laryngoscope, 130:1144–1150, 2020. © 2019 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Trends in Academic Radiology Publication in the United States Revisited Open PDF 
    (2018)
    O'Connor, Erin E.
    ;
    Chen, Pauline
    ;
    Weston, Brian
    ;
    Anderson, Redmond
    ;
    Zeffiro, Timothy
    RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Although substantial increases in publications by female academic radiologists have appeared over the last several decades, it is possible that the rate of increase is decreasing. We examined temporal trends in gender composition for full-time radiology faculty, radiology residents, and medical students over a 46-year period. METHODS: We examined authorship gender trends to determine if the increases in female authorship seen since 1970 have been sustained in recent years and whether female radiologists continue to publish in proportion to their numbers in academic departments. Original articles for selected years in Radiology and in the American Journal of Roentgenology between 1970 and 2016 were examined to determine the gender of first, corresponding, and last authors. Generalized linear models evaluated (1) changes in proportions of female authorship over time and (2) associations between proportions of female authorship and female radiology faculty representation. RESULTS: While linear increases in first, corresponding, and senior authorships were observed for female radiologists from 1970 to 2000, the rate of increase in female first and corresponding authorships then changed, with the slope of the first author relationship decreasing from 0.81 to 0.34, corresponding to 47% fewer female first authors added per year. In contrast, the proportion of female last authorship continued to increase at the same rate. The proportion of female first authorship was linearly related to the proportion of female radiology faculty from 1970 to 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Annual increases in first author academic productivity of female radiologists have lessened in the past 16 years, possibly related to reductions in the growth of female radiology faculty and trainees. As mixed, compared to homogeneous gender, authorship teams are associated with more citations, efforts to encourage more women to pursue careers in academic radiology could benefit the radiology research community.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender and citation impact in management research Open PDF 
    (2017)
    Nielsen, M.W.
    This study investigates the extent to which a gender gap exists in the citation rates of management researchers. Based on a cross-sectional sample of 26,783 publications and 65,436 authorships, we illuminate possible differences in women's and men's average citation impact per paper, adjusting for covariation attributable to geographical setting, institutional reputation, self-citations, collaborative patterns and journal prestige. We find a marginal difference in citation impact in favor of women management scholars. Women are also slightly more likely than men to author articles among the top-10% most cited in their field. Yet given the sensitivity of our results to uncertainties in the data, these variations should not be overgeneralized. In the large picture, differences in citation rates appear to be a negligible factor in the reproduction of gender inequalities in management research. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd
  • Item type:Publication,
    A “scientific diversity” intervention to reduce gender bias in a sample of life scientists Open PDF 
    (American Society for Cell Biology, 2016)
    Moss-Racusin, C.A.
    ;
    van der Toorn, J.
    ;
    Dovidio, J.F.
    ;
    Brescoll, V.L.
    ;
    Graham, M.J.
    Mounting experimental evidence suggests that subtle gender biases favoring men contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including many subfields of the life sciences. However, there are relatively few evaluations of diversity interventions designed to reduce gender biases within the STEM community. Because gender biases distort the meritocratic evaluation and advancement of students, interventions targeting instructors’ biases are particularly needed. We evaluated one such intervention, a workshop called “Scientific Diversity” that was consistent with an established framework guiding the development of diversity interventions designed to reduce biases and was administered to a sample of life science instructors (N=126) at several sessions of the National Academies Summer Institute for Undergraduate Education held nationwide. Evidence emerged indicating the efficacy of the “Scientific Diversity” work-shop, such that participants were more aware of gender bias, expressed less gender bias, and were more willing to engage in actions to reduce gender bias 2 weeks after participating in the intervention compared with 2 weeks before the intervention. Implications for diversity interventions aimed at reducing gender bias and broadening the participation of women in the life sciences are discussed. © 2016 C. A. Moss-Racusin et al. CBE—Life Sciences Education.
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender and Radiology Publication Productivity: An Examination of Academic Faculty From Four Health Systems in the United States Open PDF 
    (2017)
    McDonald, J.S.
    ;
    McDonald, R.J.
    ;
    Davenport, M.S.
    ;
    Jaffe, T.A.
    ;
    Cook, T.S.
    Objectives To compare male and female radiology faculty publication productivity metrics at four major academic centers. Materials and Methods All Radiology Department faculty members at four academic medical centers from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2015, were included. Publication metrics including total number of manuscripts published; h- and m-indices; number of publications where faculty member was listed as first, last, or sole author; whether a woman was listed as one of the first five coauthors; and year of first publication were retrieved from Scopus. Publication metrics were compared between genders using the Wilcoxon signed-rank and χ2 tests. Results A total of 711 faculty members (519 male, 192 [27%] female members) were identified. Male faculty had a significantly higher number of total publications (median 54 versus 24, P &lt;.0001), publications per year (median 2.9 versus 1.6, P &lt;.0001), and h- (median 17 versus 10, P &lt;.0001) and m-indices (median 0.83 versus 0.60, P &lt;.0001) than female faculty. Male faculty had a significantly higher percentage of single author (median 1% versus 0%, P =.0014) and last author (median 16% versus 11%, P &lt;.0001) publications than female faculty. Female faculty had a significantly higher percentage of first author publications (21% versus 17%, P =.0025) and were significantly more likely to have another woman in their first five coauthor list (70% versus 45%, P &lt;.0001) than male faculty. Conclusions Large differences exist between female and male faculty in total publications; h- and m-indices; publications per year; number of first, single, last author papers; and percentage of faculty that have a female coauthor in their top five coauthor lists. © 2017 American College of Radiology
  • Item type:Publication,
    Trends in Female Plastic Surgery Resident Authorship - Signs of Changing Times? Open PDF 
    (2022)
    Maisner, R.S.
    ;
    Cadwell, J.B.
    ;
    Mansukhani, P.A.
    ;
    Naides, A.
    ;
    Siniakowicz, C.
    OBJECTIVE: Gender discrepancies exist in academia for leadership positions, advancement opportunities, and research. As of 2019, the ratio of total male-to-female attending plastic and reconstructive surgeons was 4.8:1. However, the ratio of male-to-female residents in integrated plastic surgery programs fell to 1.3:1, indicating rising female representation. With more balanced gender distributions of residents, the authors sought to determine whether this translates to greater equality of opportunities and achievements. Specifically, this study compares the academic productivity of male and female integrated plastic surgery residents. METHODS: A list of integrated plastic surgery residency programs was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website and ranked by reputation using the Doximity Residency Navigator. Integrated plastic surgery residents from 2019 to 2020 were identified via program websites and social media accounts. Works published during residency were identified through PubMed and Scopus from July 1 of each resident's intern year through August 10, 2020. Demographic variables for residents, including training class and medical school, as well as for programs, including geographic region, Doximity ranking, and medical school affiliation, were collected. Medical schools were ranked according to US News by research. Research productivity was assessed through the number of total research articles with authorship position (first, second, or last), the number of articles published in plastic surgery journals with the highest impact factors (Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Aesthetic Surgery Journal), and H-indices. Chi-Squared tests and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to make comparisons between male and female residents (α = 0.05). RESULTS: In total, 931 residents in 81 integrated plastic surgery programs were identified, including 534 (57.4%) male and 397 (42.6%) female residents. There were no differences between male and female residents in terms of training year or program geography. Female residents were more likely to come from a top-50 medical school than males (54.7% vs. 48.1%, p = 0.049). There were no significant differences in gender distribution of residents from top-20 programs or programs affiliated with a top-20 medical school. The median (IQR) number of publications in total, and for each gender, was 3 (1-6). There was no difference in the number of total publications by training year by gender, besides the second-year resident class where male residents had a median (IQR) of 2 (1-4) compared to 1 (0-3) (p = 0.028). Male and female residents did not differ with regards to authorship position or proportion of times publishing in top journals. The distribution of H-indices for male residents was slightly higher than female residents (p = 0.003), but the median (IQR) was the same at 3 (1-5). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, male and female integrated plastic surgery residents have similar levels of academic productivity. This suggests that female representation is slowly increasing along the pipeline in academia, representing a paradigm shift from previous trends of gender inequality in plastic surgery. © 2021 Association of Program Directors in Surgery
  • Item type:Publication,
    Gender Disparities in International Research Collaboration: A Study of 25,000 University Professors Open PDF 
    (2021)
    Kwiek, M.
    ;
    Roszka, W.
    In this large-scale research based on bibliometric, biographical and administrative data, we examine how gender disparities in international research collaboration differ by collaboration intensity, academic position, age, and academic discipline. The following are the major findings: (1) While female scientists exhibit a higher rate of general, national, and institutional collaboration, male scientists exhibit a higher rate of international collaboration. (2) An aggregated picture of gender disparities hides a more nuanced cross-disciplinary picture of them. (3) An analysis of international research collaboration at three separate intensity levels (low, medium, and high) reveals that male scientists dominate in international collaboration at each level. However, at each level, there are specific disciplines in which females collaborate internationally more than males. Furthermore (4), gender disparities in international research collaboration are clearly linked with age: they are the lowest and statistically insignificant for young scientists and the highest and statistically significant for the oldest scientists. Finally, we estimate the odds ratios of being involved in international research collaboration using an analytical linear logistic model. The examined sample includes 25,463 internationally visible Polish university professors from 85 universities, grouped into 24 disciplines, and 158,743 Scopus-indexed articles. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Economic Surveys published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd