Gender trends in authorship of Pediatric Radiology publications and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

Pre- and post-COVID-19 gender trends in authorship for paediatric radiology articles worldwide: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Gender inequalities in academic medicine persist despite progress over the past decade. Evidence-based targeted interventions are needed to reduce gender inequalities.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on gender trends in authorship of paediatric radiology research worldwide.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospectively registered, PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2018, to May 29, 2023, with no restrictions on country of origin. Screening and data extraction occurred independently and in duplicate. Gender of first, last, and corresponding authors were determined using an artificial intelligence-powered, validated, multinational database ( www.genderize.io ). Two time periods were categorised according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering: pre-COVID (prior to March 2020) and peak and post-COVID (March 2020 onwards). One-sample binomial testing was used to analyse proportion of authorship based on gender. Categorical variables were described as frequencies and percentages, and compared using testing chi-square or Fisher exact testing, with a threshold of P<0.05 representing statistical significance.

RESULTS

In total, 922 articles were included with 39 countries represented. A statistically significant difference in authorship based on gender persisted during the peak and post-COVID time period (March 2020 onwards) where women represented a statistically significant lower proportion of last (35.5%) and corresponding (42.7%) authors (P<0.001, P=0.001, respectively). Statistically significant differences for first authors were not found in either period (P=0.08 and P=0.48).

CONCLUSION

This study identifies differences in gender trends for authorship in paediatric radiology research worldwide. Future efforts to increase authorship by women are needed.

The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Academic Research Gender Disparities in Radiology

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Gender disparities have long existed in radiology. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted research activities worldwide and have impacted gender disparities across medical specialties. This study investigates the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender disparities in radiology academic authorship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted using data from 110 843 global and 23 977 US radiology articles. The gender of authors was determined using an automated gender inference tool. Descriptive statistics were applied to explore authorship changes overall globally, in the US as well as across countries and states.

RESULTS

Female first-authorship increased globally from 16.9% to 17.6% (p < 0.001), and in the US, from 19.0% to 19.6% (p = 0.19) in the peri-COVID period. The combined female percentage increased from 19.7% to 20.0% globally (p = 0.021), and from 20.2% to 21.1% in the US (p = 0.006). Country-level analysis revealed significant increases in female authorship in Colombia, Denmark, Egypt, France, India, and Japan, while New Zealand demonstrated a decrease in female authorship. In the US, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and Ohio experienced increases in female authorship, whereas South Carolina demonstrated a decrease in female authorship.

CONCLUSION

In contrast with other medical fields, the study demonstrates that radiology experienced a slight increase in female authorship in radiology research globally and in the US during the COVID period. While the pandemic may have influenced these findings, further research is needed to establish regional causal relationships and identify best practices for promoting gender equity in radiology research.

Gender disparity in academic advancement: exploring differences among adult and pediatric radiologists

BACKGROUND

Gender imbalance in research output and academic rank in academic radiology is well-documented and long-standing. Less is known regarding this imbalance among pediatric radiologists.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize gender differences for academic rank and scholarly productivity of pediatric radiologists relative to adult radiologists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During summer 2021, faculty data for the top 10 U.S. News & World Report ranked adult radiology programs and the top 12 largest pediatric hospital radiology departments were collected. Information regarding self-reported gender, age, years of practice and academic rank was accessed from institutional websites and public provider databases. The h-index and the number of publications were acquired via Scopus. Group comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Three hundred and sixty-four (160 women) pediatric and 1,170 (468 women) adult radiologists were included. Compared to adult radiologists, there were significantly fewer pediatric radiologists in advanced ranks (associate or full professor) (P = 0.024), driven by differences between male (P = 0.033) but not female radiologists (P = 0.67). Among pediatric radiologists, there was no significant difference in years in practice (P = 0.29) between males and females. There also was no significant difference in academic rank by gender (P = 0.37), different from adult radiology where men outnumber women in advanced ranks (P < 0.001). Male pediatric radiologists displayed higher academic productivity (h-index: 9.0 vs. 7.0; P = 0.01 and number of publications: 31 vs. 18; P = 0.003) than their female colleagues.

CONCLUSION

Academic pediatric radiology seems to have more equitable academic advancement than academic adult radiology. Despite similar time in the workforce, academic output among female pediatric radiologists lags that of their male colleagues.

Academic Productivity of Equity-Deserving Physician Scholars During COVID-19: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic presented new barriers and exacerbated existing inequities for physician scholars. While COVID-19's impact on academic productivity among women has received attention, the pandemic may have posed additional challenges for scholars from a wider range of equity-deserving groups, including those who hold multiple equity-deserving identities. To examine this concern, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature through an intersectionality lens.

METHOD

The authors searched peer-reviewed literature published March 1, 2020, to December 16, 2021, in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed. The authors excluded studies not written in English and/or outside of academic medicine. From included studies, they extracted data regarding descriptions of how COVID-19 impacted academic productivity of equity-deserving physician scholars, analyses on the pandemic's reported impact on productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, and strategies provided to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academic productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups.

RESULTS

Of 11,587 unique articles, 44 met inclusion criteria, including 15 nonempirical studies and 29 empirical studies (22 bibliometrics studies, 6 surveys, and 1 qualitative study). All included articles focused on the gendered impact of the pandemic on academic productivity. The majority of their recommendations focused on how to alleviate the burden of the pandemic on women, particularly those in the early stages of their career and/or with children, without consideration of scholars who hold multiple and intersecting identities from a wider range of equity-deserving groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate a lack of published literature on the pandemic's impact on physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, including a lack of consideration of physician scholars who experience multiple forms of discrimination. Well-intentioned measures by academic institutions to reduce the impact on scholars may inadvertently risk reproducing and sustaining inequities that equity-deserving scholars faced during the pandemic.

Trends in gender of first and senior authors of articles published in JMIRO

INTRODUCTION

Despite progress of women in science and medicine, women remain underrepresented in academic publication. The aim of this study was to evaluate potential gender differences in women authorship in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (JMIRO).

METHODS

Gender of the first and senior author of all articles published in JMIRO between 2012 and 2021 were examined. Changes over time and differences among groups were compared using the chi-square test.

RESULTS

In total, 1,138 articles were assessed. Women were first and senior authors on 34% and 25% of all articles respectively. The proportion of women as first author was 30%, 41% and 36% for medical imaging (MI), radiation oncology (RO) and combined MI/RO articles respectively. Similarly, the proportion of women as senior author was lower than men at 22%, 32% and 23% for MI, RO and MI/RO articles respectively. Women first authorship over the study period remained stable from 2014 (36%) to 2020 (38%); however, it decreased dramatically in 2021 to 28%. There was a trend of increasing women senior authorship from 2013 (15%) to 2017 (35%) but decreased to 23% in 2021.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 10 years of publications, one in three first authors were women and only one in four senior authors were women. The acknowledgement of this imbalance is the first step to pave the way towards addressing underlying systemic issues related to academic publication and disparities in gender and other inequities.

Scientific authorship by gender: trends before and during a global pandemic

Many fields of science are still dominated by men. COVID-19 has dramatically changed the nature of work, including for scientists, such as lack of access to key resources and transition to online teaching. Further, scientists face the pandemic-related stressors common to other professions (e.g., childcare, eldercare). As many of these activities fall more heavily on women, the pandemic may have exacerbated gender disparities in science. We analyzed self-identified gender of corresponding author for 119,592 manuscripts from 151 countries submitted January 2019 to July 2021 to the Institute of Physics (IOP) portfolio of 57 academic journals, with disciplines of astronomy and astrophysics, bioscience, environmental science, materials, mathematics, physics, and interdisciplinary research. We consider differences by country, journal, and pre-pandemic versus pandemic periods. Gender was self-identified by corresponding author for 82.9% of manuscripts (N = 99,114 for subset of submissions with gender). Of these manuscripts, authors were 82.1% male, 17.8% female, and 0.08% non-binary. Most authors were male for all countries (country-specific values: range 0.0-100.0%, median 86.1%) and every journal (journal-specific values range 63.7-91.5%, median 83.7%). The contribution of female authors was slightly higher in the pandemic (18.7%) compared to pre-pandemic (16.5%). However, prior to the pandemic, the percent of submissions from women had been increasing, and this value slowed during the pandemic. Contrary to our hypothesis, we did not find that manuscript submissions from women decreased during the pandemic, although the rate of increased submissions evident prior to the pandemic slowed. In both pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, authorship was overwhelmingly male for all journals, countries, and fields. Further research is needed on impacts of the pandemic on other measures of scientific productivity (e.g., accepted manuscripts, teaching), scientific position (e.g., junior vs. senior scholars), as well as the underlying gender imbalance that persisted before and during the pandemic.