Gender and authorship trends in rhinology, allergy, and skull-base literature from 2008 to 2018

Factors Associated with Research Productivity and National Institutes of Health Funding in Academic Otology

OBJECTIVES

Bibliometrics, such as the Hirsch index (h-index) and the more recently developed relative citation ratio (RCR), are utilized to evaluate research productivity. Our study evaluates demographics, research productivity, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in academic otology.

METHODS

Academic otologists were identified, and their demographics were collected using institutional faculty profiles (N = 265). Funding data were obtained using the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports Database. The h-index was calculated using Scopus and mean (m-RCR) and weighted RCR (w-RCR) were calculated using the NIH iCite tool.

RESULTS

H-index (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.27, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97-2.31, p = 0.069) or w-RCR (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p = 0.231), was associated with receiving NIH funding. Men had greater h-index (16 vs. 9, p < 0.001) and w-RCR (51.8 vs. 23.0, p < 0.001), but not m-RCR (1.3 vs. 1.3, p = 0.269) than women. Higher academic rank was associated with greater h-index and w-RCR (p < 0.001). Among assistant professors, men had greater h-index than women (9.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.025). At career duration 11-20 years, men had greater h-index (14.0 vs. 8.0, p = 0.009) and w-RCR (52.7 vs. 25.8, p = 0.022) than women.

CONCLUSION

The h-index has a strong relationship with NIH funding in academic otology. Similar h-index, m-RCR, and w-RCR between men and women across most academic ranks and career durations suggests production of similarly impactful research. The m-RCR may correct some deficiencies of time-dependent bibliometrics and its consideration in academic promotion and research funding allocation may promote representation of women in otology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3786-3794, 2024.

Gender Differences in North American and International Otolaryngology Clinical Practice Guideline Authorship: A 17-Year Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze gender differences in authorship of North American (Canadian and American) and international published otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) clinical practice guidelines (CPG) over a 17-year period.

METHODS

Clinical practice guidelines published between 2005 and 2022 were identified through the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH) search strategy in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Studies were included if they were original studies, published in the English language, and encompassed Canadian, American, or international OHNS clinical practice guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 145 guidelines were identified, encompassing 661 female authors (27.4%) and 1756 male authors (72.7%). Among OHNS authors, women and men accounted for 21.2% and 78.8% of authors, respectively. Women who were involved in guideline authorship were 31.0% less likely to be an otolaryngologist compared to men. There were no gender differences across first or senior author and by subspeciality. Female otolaryngologist representation was the greatest in rhinology (28.3%) and pediatrics (26.7%). American guidelines had the greatest proportion of female authors per guideline (34.1%) and the greatest number of unique female authors (33.2%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the increasing representation of women in OHNS, gender gaps exist with regards to authorship within clinical practice guidelines. Greater gender diversity and transparency is required within guideline authorship to help achieve equitable gender representation and the development of balanced guidelines with a variety of viewpoints.

Gender Authorship Trends Among Craniofacial Publications: A 20-Year Analysis

This study aims to identify gender disparities within the subspecialty of craniofacial surgery as women surgeons remain underrepresented in academia and leadership, arenas heavily dictated by research productivity.

All craniofacial articles published in 3 major research journals from 2000 to 2020 were reviewed and evaluated in 5-year increments.

Information regarding author gender, authorship distribution, geographic origin, and publication type was collected. ANOVA, χ2, and logistic regression modeling were used for analysis.

In total, there were 3684 articles with 15 206 total authors-3128 (20.6%) were women, including 665 (21.3%) first authors, 1980 (63.2%) middle authors, and 487 (15.7%) senior authors. Mean women authorship increased significantly from 2000 to 2020 (0.33 vs 1.22 P < .001) with corresponding significant increases in first and senior authorship (8.63% vs 27.02; 5.65% vs 16.13%; P < .001). Statistically significant trends across time were observed for first and senior authorships (P < .001). Women were more likely to publish original publications as first and senior authors (OR: 1.83, P < .001; OR: 1.37, P = .0012). Women were less likely to publish editorial articles (OR 0.6, P < .001). The United States ranked third in publication output by female first authors but was behind all regions except Africa for output by female senior authors.

Although female authorship has increased significantly over the last 2 decades, women remain a minority within the craniofacial literature. Further research is needed to elicit the root of these disparities.

Female and low- and middle-income authorship trends in high-impact ENT journals (2011-2020)

Introduction

Despite a recent drive to increase diversity, the global academic workforce is skewed in favor of authors from high-income countries, and women are under-represented in the published medical literature.

Objectives

To explore the trends in authorship of three high-impact otolaryngology journals over a ten-year period (2011-2020).

Methods

Journals selected: JAMA Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Laryngoscope and Rhinology. Articles were reviewed from four issues per journal per year, and data was collected on: time of publication; subspeciality; number of authors; sex of first and last authors; country of practice of first author and country where each study was conducted. Trends were examined though univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

Results

2998 articles were included. 93.9% of first authors and 94.2% of studies were from high-income countries.Women were first authors in 31.5% (n = 912) and senior authors in 18.4% (n = 524) of articles. Female first authorship significantly increased between 2011 and 2020 however female senior authorship remained the same. There have been no significant changes in the proportion of published articles from low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) over time (p = .65). Amongst the LMIC articles, 72% came from Brazil, Turkey or China and there were no published papers from countries with a low-income economy (gross national income per capita of $1085 or less).

Conclusions

Although female first authorship has increased in the last decade, there has been minimal other demographic change in authorship over this time. High-impact otolaryngology journals poorly represent academia in low-and-middle income countries. There is a need for increased advocacy promoting gender and geographical research equity in academic medicine.

Level of Evidence

III.

A 20-Year Analysis of Global Authorship Trends in Craniofacial Literature: Is the United States Falling Behind?

INTRODUCTION

Recent advances in craniofacial surgery have occurred in conjunction with a global proliferation of research. Although previous studies have examined geographic publication trends, little is known about these trends in the craniofacial literature.

METHODS

All craniofacial articles published from 2000 to 2020 in 3 premier craniofacial surgery journals were evaluated in 5-year increments. Geographic origin, manuscript type, and authorship characteristics were collected. Changes in publication output, geographic origin, and content were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total 3864 articles were analyzed, with the United States (U.S.) (33.46%) accounting for the majority, followed by Asia (27.04%), the Middle East (16.23%), and Europe (14.65%). The proportion of articles from the U.S. decreased significantly in the in the 20-year span (48.28% versus 33.53%, P < 0.001), whereas those originating from Asia and the Middle East increased significantly (18.62% versus 31.41% and 10.34% versus 15.66%, respectively, P < 0.001). After stratifying and selecting for regions with the greatest changes in publication output, the authors observed significant trends for the number of original investigations from 2000 to 2020 in the U.S. (Odds Ratio [OR] 1 versus 2.4, P < 0.001) and in Asia (OR 1 versus 1.8, P = 0.0052). Additionally, a significant trend in editorial/correspondence publications originating in the U.S. (OR 1 versus 0.74, P = 0.0102), Europe (OR 1 versus 0.38, P = 0.0186), and Asia (OR 1 versus 0.48, P = 0.0051) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite rising craniofacial publications over the past 2 decades, there has been a diminishing proportion originating from the U.S.