Dataset Information

Gender disparities in pediatric research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The proportion of women in medicine, especially in pediatrics, is noticeably increasing. Yet, leadership positions are predominantly occupied by men.

Methods

Academic authorships of 156,642 pediatric original research articles were analyzed with regard to gender disparities. The evaluation included the proportion of female authorships (FAP), distributions over first-, co- and last-authorships, gender-related citation rates, a productivity analysis and investigations on journals, countries and pediatric sub-disciplines.

Results

In all, 46.6% of all authorships in pediatric research were held by female authors. Women held relatively more first-authorships (FAP = 52%) and had higher odds for first- (OR = 1.3) and co- (OR = 1.11) authorships, compared to men. The Prestige Index of -0.13 indicated an underrepresentation of female authors at prestigious first- and last-authorships. Citation rates were not affected by the gender of the key authors. At the country-level pronounced gender-related differences were detected. The time trend showed increasing female prospects forecasting a female-dominated Prestige Index of 0.05 in 2023.

Conclusion

The integration of women in pediatric research has advanced. Opportunities for female authors differ at the country-level, but overall women are lacking in leadership positions. Improving career opportunities for women in pediatric research can be expected in the coming years.

Impact

There is a measurable progress in the integration of female scientists. Gender-neutrality is partially achieved in pediatric research with yet a female underrepresentation in leading positions. Our descriptive study presents gender-related dynamics in pediatric research that forecast improving career opportunities for female scientists.

SUBMITTER: Bohme K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9411057 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gender disparities in pediatric research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships.

Böhme Katja K Klingelhöfer Doris D Groneberg David A DA Bendels Michael H K MHK

Pediatric research 20220328 1

<h4>Background</h4>The proportion of women in medicine, especially in pediatrics, is noticeably increasing. Yet, leadership positions are predominantly occupied by men.<h4>Methods</h4>Academic authorships of 156,642 pediatric original research articles were analyzed with regard to gender disparities. The evaluation included the proportion of female authorships (FAP), distributions over first-, co- and last-authorships, gender-related citation rates, a productivity analysis and investigations on ...[more]

PMID: 35347277

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe present study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-quality dermatological research by analysing the representation of female authorships from January 2008 to May 2017.DesignRetrospective, descriptive study.Setting113 189 male and female authorships from 23 373 research articles published in 23 dermatological Q1 journals were analysed with the aid of the Gendermetrics Platform.Results43.0% of all authorships and 50.2% of the firstauthorships, 43.7% of the coauthorships and 33.1% of the last authorships are held by women. The corresponding female-to-male ORs are 1.41 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.45) for first authorships, 1.07 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.10) for coauthorships and 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62) for last authorships. The annual growth rates are 1.74% overall and 1.45% for first authorships, 1.53% for coauthorships and 2.97% for last authorships. Women are slightly under-represented at prestigious authorships compared with men (Prestige Index=-0.11). The under-representation remains stable in highly competitive articles attracting the highest citation rates, namely, articles with many authors and articles that were published in highest-impact journals. Multiauthor articles with male key authors are only slightly more frequently cited than those with female key authors. Women publish slightly fewer papers compared with men (47.2% women hold 43.0% of the authorships). At the level of individual journals, there is a high degree of uniformity in gender-specific authorship odds. By contrast, distinct differences at country level were revealed. The prognosis for the next decades forecasts a consecutive harmonisation of authorship odds between the two genders.ConclusionsIn high-quality dermatological research, the integration of female scholars is advanced as compared with other medical disciplines. A gender gap consists mainly in the form of a career dichotomy, with many female early career researchers and few women in academic leadership positions. However, this gender gap has been narrowed in the last decade and will likely be further reduced in the future.

Project description:ImportancePrevious studies examined sex distributions in different medical faculties, especially because increasingly more women entered the medical field in recent decades. Little is known at present about the female representation in ophthalmic research.ObjectiveTo clarify sex equalities in ophthalmic research by evaluating the representation of female authorships.Design and settingThis bibliometric analysis included original English-language articles published in ophthalmologic journals indexed in the Web of Science from January 2008 to August 2018. Authorships were assigned by sex according to first name.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included the proportion of female authorships, odds ratios of women holding prestigious first and last authorships compared with men (measured by the prestige index), citation rates, a productivity analysis, and cross-journal and transnational female representation within ophthalmic research. The hypothesis was formulated during data collection.ResultsBibliometric data were abstracted from 87 640 original articles published in 248 ophthalmologic journals. Of 344 433 total authorships, female scholars held 34.9% (120 305 of 344 433) of all authorships, 37.1% (24 924 of 67 226) of first authorships, 36.7% (77 295 of 210 372) of coauthorships, and 27.1% (18 086 of 66 835) of last authorships. The female-to-male odds ratio was 1.12 (95% CI, 1.10-1.14) for first authorships, 1.20 (95% CI, 1.18-1.22) for coauthorships, and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.62-0.64) for last authorships, with annual growth rates of 1.6% overall, 1.6% for first authorships, 1.3% for coauthorships, and 2.5% for last authorships. Women were underrepresented in prestigious authorships (prestige index = -0.22). The underrepresentation remains almost stable for articles with many authors (prestige index = -0.17 for articles with >9 authors per article). Articles with female key authors were cited slightly less frequently (95% CI for female vs male authors, 10.8-11.0 vs 11.5-11.7 citations/articles). Women published fewer papers than men (42.5% [n = 41 383]; women held 34.9% [n = 120 207] of the authorships), show cross-journal uniformity and differences among single countries (change in prestige index = 0.66 vs 1.96). Overall, 44.1% of female authorships and a sex-neutral distribution of prestigious authorships are prognosticated for 2028.Conclusions and relevanceThis algorithm analysis suggests the integration of women into ophthalmic research is average compared with other disciplines. A sex-specific gap exists for last authorship, suggesting career inequalities. With a growing number of female researchers in ophthalmology, the number of women in senior ranks may increase in the future.

Project description:IntroductionDespite the Zambian government making progress on prioritising gender mainstreaming, female participation in science, technology and innovation in academia, research and development is still low. This study aims to determine the integration of gender dimensions and the factors that influence female participation in science and health research in Zambia.Methods and analysisWe propose a descriptive cross-sectional study design employing in-depth interviews (IDIs) and survey as data collection techniques. Twenty schools offering science-based programmes will be purposively selected from University of Zambia (UNZA), Copperbelt University, Mulungushi University and Kwame Nkrumah University. In addition, two research institutions, Tropical Disease Research Centre and Mount Makulu Agricultural Research Station, will be included. Survey respondents will include a random sample of 1389 academic and research staff from the selected schools. A total of 30 IDIs will be conducted with staff and heads of selected schools and research institutions. Data collection will be conducted over a 12-month period. Before commencement of data collection, in-depth literature search and record review on gender dimensions in science and health research will be conducted to gain insight into the subject matter and inform research instrument design. Survey data and IDIs will be collected using a structured paper-based questionnaire and semistructured interview guide, respectively. Descriptive statistics will be computed to summarise respondents' characteristics. Bivariate analysis (χ2 test and independent t-test) and multivariate regression analysis will be conducted to test the association and identify factors influencing female participation in science and health research (adjusted ORs, p<0.05). An inductive approach will be used to analyse qualitative data using NVivo. Survey and IDI will be corroborated.Ethics and disseminationThis study involves human participants and was approved by UNZA Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (UNZABREC; UNZA BREC 1674-2022). Participants gave informed consent to participate in the study before taking part. Study findings will be disseminated through a written report, stakeholder meetings and publication in a peer-reviewed international journal.

Project description:ObjectiveScientific authorship is a vital marker of achievement in academic careers and gender equity is a key performance metric in research. However, there is little understanding of gender equity in publications in biomedical research centres funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). This study assesses the gender parity in scientific authorship of biomedical research.DesignDescriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective bibliometric study.SettingNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).DataData comprised 2409 publications that were either accepted or published between April 2012 and March 2017. The publications were classified as basic science studies, clinical studies (both trial and non-trial studies) and other studies (comments, editorials, systematic reviews, reviews, opinions, book chapters, meeting reports, guidelines and protocols).Main outcome measuresGender of authors, defined as a binary variable comprising either male or female categories, in six authorship categories: first author, joint first authors, first corresponding author, joint corresponding authors, last author and joint last authors.ResultsPublications comprised 39% clinical research (n=939), 27% basic research (n=643) and 34% other types of research (n=827). The proportion of female authors as first author (41%), first corresponding authors (34%) and last author (23%) was statistically significantly lower than male authors in these authorship categories (p<0.001). Of total joint first authors (n=458), joint corresponding authors (n=169) and joint last authors (n=229), female only authors comprised statistically significant (p<0.001) smaller proportions, that is, 15% (n=69), 29% (n=49) and 10% (n=23) respectively, compared with male only authors in these joint authorship categories. There was a statistically significant association between gender of the last author with gender of the first author (p<0.001), first corresponding author (p<0.001) and joint last author (p<0.001). The mean journal impact factor (JIF) was statistically significantly higher when the first corresponding author was male compared with female (Mean JIF: 10.00 vs 8.77, p=0.020); however, the JIF was not statistically different when there were male and female authors as first authors and last authors.ConclusionsAlthough the proportion of female authors is significantly lower than the proportion of male authors in all six categories of authorship analysed, the proportions of male and female last authors are comparable to their respective proportions as principal investigators in the BRC. These findings suggest positive trends and the NIHR Oxford BRC doing very well in gender parity in the senior (last) authorship category. Male corresponding authors are more likely to publish articles in prestigious journals with high impact factor while both male and female authors at first and last authorship positions publish articles in equally prestigious journals.

Dataset Information

Gender disparities in pediatric research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Impact

Publications

Gender disparities in pediatric research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets