Gender Disparity Among Surgical Peer-Reviewed Literature

Surgical subspecialist distribution and Social Vulnerability Indices in the inland empire

Background

Access to surgical specialty care differs based on geographic location, insurance status, and subspecialty type. This study uses the Inland Empire as a model to determine the relationship between Social Vulnerability Indices (SVIs), surgeon sex, and surgical subspecialty distribution.

Methods

823 census tracts from the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) SVI 2018 database were compared against 992 surgeons within 30 distinct subspecialties. This data was retrieved from the American Medical Association's (AMA) 2018 Physician Masterfile. Spearman's bivariate and multiple regression were used to compare the relationship between SVI and number of surgical subspecialists within each census tract.

Results

There were approximately 3.34 male and 0.35 female surgeons per census tract (t(267) = 7.74, p < 0.001). Significant inverse relationships existed between Cosmetic surgery, Urology and Minority status/language (ρ = -0.131 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.028], p = 0.016; ρ = -0.142 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.039], p = 0.010, respectively); General surgery, Socioeconomic status (ρ = -0.118 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.014], p = 0.027), and Household composition/disability (ρ = -0.203 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.102], p < 0.001); Hand surgery and Socioeconomic status (ρ = -0.114 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.010], p = 0.031); Otolaryngology, Housing type/transportation (ρ = -0.102 [95 % CI -1.000 to 0.001], p = 0.047), and Overall Social Vulnerability (ρ = -0.105 [95 % CI -1.000 to -0.001], p = 0.043). Multiple regression analyses reinforced these findings.

Conclusions

This study concludes that social vulnerability is predictive of, and significantly linked to, differences in distribution of surgical subspecialty and surgeon gender. Future research should investigate recruitment of a diverse surgical workforce, infrastructural barriers to care, and differences in quality of care.

Key message

Our work demonstrates complex relationships between surgical subspecialist distribution, surgeon gender, and a census tract's various Social Vulnerability Indices. Thus, this research can serve to continue educating surgeons and other healthcare providers about the importance of social determinants of health in the construction of healthcare policy and practice, as well as incentivizing equitable recruitment of a diverse population of surgeons.

Scientific Output by Latin American Women in Pediatric Surgical Sciences Over the Past 11 Years: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This academic article discusses the historical underrepresentation of female in science, with a focus on Latin America. It highlights the importance of both technical and non-technical skills in the medical-surgical field, particularly the role of research skills. The study aims to quantify and characterize the scientific output of Latin American female researchers over the past decade, providing insights into the challenges and opportunities in low and middle-income countries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional bibliometric study was conducted in 2023, focusing on pediatric surgical science journals in Scopus and PubMed. It assessed Latin American female participation, journal details, and interaction networks, using SPSS and Gephi software. The period analyzed was from January 2012 to December 2022.

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2022, 727 articles with Latin authorship in pediatric surgery were analyzed across 304 journals. Of these, 63.69% had female co-authors. The majority were original articles (53.13%), with contributions from Brazil, Mexico, and Chile. Notable journals included the Journal of Pediatric Surgery and Child's Nervous System. Keywords like Laparoscopy and Cardiac surgery were common. A growth trend in female Latin American publications was observed, despite temporary declines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights a growing trend in Latin American females' scientific contributions to pediatric surgery from 2012 to 2022, although a gender gap persists. The research mainly consists of primary data studies, with a focus on Brazil and Mexico from public institutions. The Journal of Pediatric Surgery featured prominently, and common topics included Laparoscopy, Cardiac surgery, Liver transplant, Congenital heart defects, and COVID-19.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Uncovering gaps in women's authorship: A big data analysis in academic surgery

INTRODUCTION

Women are underrepresented in surgical authorship. Using big data analyses, we aimed to investigate women's representation as first and last authors in surgical publications worldwide and identify underlying predictors.

METHODS

We retrieved eligible surgical journals using Scimago Journal & Country Rank 2021. We queried articles indexed in PubMed from selected journals published between January 2018 and April 2022. We used the EDirect tool to extract bibliometric data, including first and last authors' names, primary affiliation country, and publication year. Countries and dependent territories were classified following World Bank income levels and regions. Women's representation was predicted from forenames using the Gender-API software. Citations were included if gender accuracy was ≥80%.

RESULTS

We analyzed 210,853 citations containing both first and last authors' forenames, representing 158 countries and 14 territories. Women constituted 23.8% (50,161/210,853) of the first and 14.7% (31,069/210,853) of the last authors. High-income economies had more women as first authors than other income categories (p < 0.001), but fewer women as last authors than upper-middle- and lower-middle-income economies (p < 0.001). The odds of the first author being a woman were more than three times higher when the last author was also a woman (OR 3.21, 95% CI 3.13-3.30) and vice versa (OR 3.25, 95% CI 3.16-3.34) after adjusting for income level and publication year.

CONCLUSIONS

Women remain globally underrepresented in surgical authorship. Our findings urge concerted global efforts to overcome identified disparities.

The Gender Gap in Surgical Literature: Are We Making Progress?

INTRODUCTION

The percentage of women in surgical leadership roles is not commensurate with percent of women in field of surgery. Citation indexes are used as proxy for scholarly impact and may serve as an indicator of women's progress in academic surgery. We aimed to evaluate gender disparities in authorship of surgery manuscripts in high-impact journals.

METHODS

In this bibliometric analysis of original research articles from four high-impact surgical journals from 2008 to 2010 (period A) and 2018-2020 (period B), the gender of primary and senior authors was assigned by Genderize.io. Number of citations per article was identified via Web of Science. Number of citations by gender of authors was compared across time periods.

RESULTS

Of the 3575 articles (Period A = 1915; Period B = 1660), 962 (26.9%) had women as primary authors and 590 (17.2%) as senior authors. Over time, significant increases in women primary and senior authorship were noted from 22.8% to 31.7% (P < 0.001) and 13.9% (254/11,915) to 21% (336/1660), respectively (P < 0.001). Articles written with women primary authors had fewer median (interquartile range) citations than those by men as primary author in period A (39 [17-69.5] versus 42 [20.0-84.0]; P = 0.005). Gender parity was noted in period B (9 [4-19] versus 9 [4-20] citations; P = 0.307). In period A, articles written by women as both primary and senior authors had approximately 25% fewer median citations compared with those by men (34 [17-62] versus 44 [21-86]); P < 0.011), and this reached parity in period B (9 [4-20] versus 9 [4-21]); P < 0.658).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, gender authorship and citations parity are improving in high-impact surgery journals.

Representation of Women Authorship in the Top 5 Transplantation Journals in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, only 13% of transplant surgeons are women. We evaluated gender distribution and trends of American authorship over the past 10 y in high-impact solid organ transplantation journals to gain insight into the current status of women authorship in transplantation.

METHODS

Original articles from 2012 to 2021 from the 5 highest-impact solid organ transplantation journals were extracted from Scopus. First and last author's gender was predicted using Genderize.io. Data of first and last authors, article type and topic, location, citation, and funding metrics were analyzed. Chi-square, logistic regression, and trend tests were performed where appropriate. Statistical significance was set at <0.05.

RESULTS

Women's first and last authorship increased over time among all journals. There was an increase in women first authors in the American Journal of Transplantation and in senior women authors in Liver Transplantation and Transplantation . Significant differences in gender authorship in lung, intestine, pancreas, general, and islet cell transplantation were found. Women's last authorship was associated with 1.69 higher odds of having a woman first author when adjusting for year and journal. There was an increase in the rate of women's first and last author collaborations over the years. Women last authors had 1.5 higher odds of being funded by the National Institutes of Health over the years.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in women transplant surgeons and physicians, the gap in women authorship in transplantation persists. Women's last authorship was associated with higher odds of having a woman first author, pointing to the importance of mentorship for women joining the transplant academia.

The power of partnership: Exploring collaboration dynamics in U.S. transplant research

INTRODUCTION

Collaboration is one of the hallmarks of academic research. This study analyzes collaboration patterns in U.S. transplant research, examining publication trends, productive institutions, co-authorship networks, and citation patterns in high-impact transplant journals.

METHODS

4,265 articles published between 2012 and 2021 were analyzed using scientometric tools, logistic regression, VantagePoint software, and Gephi software for network visualization.

RESULTS

16,003 authors from 1,011 institutions and 59 countries were identified, with Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and University of Pennsylvania contributing the most papers. Odds of international collaboration significantly increased over time (OR 1.03; p ​= ​0.040), while odds of citation in single-institution collaborations decreased (OR 0.99; p ​= ​0.016). Five major scientific communities and central institutions (Harvard University and University of Pittsburgh) connecting them were identified, revealing interconnected research clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration enhances knowledge exchange and research productivity, with an increasing trend of institutional and international collaboration in U.S. transplant research. Understanding this community is essential for promoting research impact and forming strategic partnerships.

Authorship Trends and Disparities in Cardiothoracic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous investigations have revealed significant gender disparities in the academic arenas of cardiothoracic surgery. However, the status of gender representation in cardiothoracic publications has not been well described. This study aimed to evaluate authorship trends by gender in two high-impact cardiothoracic surgical journals.

METHODS

In this bibliometric analysis, PubMed was searched for articles published in The Annals of Thoracic Surgery and the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery from 2010 to 2021. The web-based application Genderize.io was used to classify names of first and last authors as men vs women. The Cochran-Armitage trend test and multivariable logistic regression were used to evaluate authorship per year and the association of first and last author gender, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 14,443 articles, 16.7% had women first authors and 8.1% had women last authors. The proportion of articles written by women authors increased, rising from 12.6% to 21.1% (P < .0001) for first and 5.4% to 11.5% (P < .0001) for last authors. Papers written with women as first author were associated with 2.0 higher odds of having a woman as last author (95% CI, 1.7-2.3; P < .0001). The mean number of last author publications was higher for men than for women (2.4 vs 1.7, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past decade, despite a welcomed increase in women authorship in high-impact journals in cardiothoracic surgery, women represent a small proportion of published authors. Women first authors are more likely to publish with women last authors, demonstrating the impact of same-gender collaborations while emphasizing a need for cross-gender mentorship.

Gender authorship trends of gastric cancer in the top journals of gastroenterology: A 20-year perspective

Gender authorship trends have been explored in varied medical specialties, and no study had observed in the field of gastric cancer. Therefore, we aimed to access whether the "gender gap" in authorship existed in gastric cancer in the leading gastroenterological journals over the last 2 decades. All original articles published from 2000 to 2020 in 9 leading gastroenterological journals were collected. Information on the first and senior author's gender, country of author's institution, and impact factor of journals were collected. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used for data analysis. A total of 5785 original articles were included and analyzed, of which 440 (7.61%) were articles on gastric cancer and 5345 (92.39%) covered other topics. Fewer female authors published original articles as first (19.32%, 85/440) and senior authors (14.32%, 63/440) compared with males. Remarkably, a significant increase in female authorship was discovered. The proportion of female first authors grown from 12.99% to 30.89% during the last 20 years (P < .001), but not in senior authors (P = .175). Multivariable logistic analysis showed that female first authors demonstrated a higher percentage when senior authors were female (odds ratio, 2.040; 95% confidence interval, 1.105-3.769). Although a statistically ascending tendency in female first authors on gastric cancer has been going on over the last 20 years, the exorbitant gender gap still exists. This gap may help explain the continued underrepresentation of women within both clinical work and academic research, and prompt us to look further for the underlying causes.

Gender Bias in Clinical Trial Enrollment: Female Authorship Matters

BACKGROUND

Despite initiatives to promote equal enrollment of human subjects in clinical trials, females continue to be underrepresented. The goal of this work is to determine if female enrollment in human clinical trials published in 3 high-impact journals from 2015 to 2019 is correlated with gender of first and/or senior authors.

METHODS

Clinical trials published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019, were reviewed. Trials were excluded for ongoing enrollment, sex-specific disease research, or author name without gender assignment. One-sample χ2 pairwise comparisons and two-tailed proportion tests on the proportion of females between gender author pairings were done overall and for each subset analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 1,427 articles enrolled a total of 2,104,509 females and 2,616,981 males (44.6% vs. 55.4%, P ≤ 0.0001) in clinical trials. Overall, more females were enrolled if both first and senior authors were female (51.7% vs. 48.3%, P ≤ 0.0001). Proportion of females enrolled decreased with the following first and senior author pairings: female-male (48.9%), male-female (48.6%), and male-male (40.5%, P ≤ 0.0001 compared to female-female authorship). Greater female enrollment in clinical trials with female-female compared to male-male authorship persisted in subset analyses by funding source, phase, randomization for study participants, drug and/or device trial, and geographic location. Female enrollment was higher in 3 surgical specialties: neurosurgery (all authors: 52%, P ≤ 0.01), ophthalmology (all authors: 53.6%, P ≤ 0.0001), and surgery (all authors: 54.4%, P ≤ 0.0001). The majority of surgical specialties did not publish trials with female-female authorship but when stratifying by author gender pairing, surgical oncology had the highest female enrollment with female-female authorship (98.4%, P ≤ 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Female authorship of clinical trial publications, specifically having both first and senior authors as female, was correlated with higher female enrollment in clinical trials when compared to male authorship and endured with multiple subset analyses.

Surgical Fellowships Demonstrate Variable Improvement in Gender Representation Despite Greater Female Enrollment in General Surgery Residencies

OBJECTIVE

Despite increasing female representation in General Surgery (GS) residency training programs, proportional improvement of female enrollment in surgical fellowships has yet to be quantified. We aimed to assess if female enrollment in surgical fellowships has improved at an equivalent rate in 7 different surgical fellowship options after GS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Data were collected from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) resources which disclosed active resident and fellow characteristics. Gender identification was self-reported by residents to ACGME. Gender data collected for GS programs and surgical fellowships including Surgical Critical Care, Colon, and Rectal Surgery, Pediatric Surgery, Plastic Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Thoracic Surgery, and Vascular Surgery from annual reports. Pearson Chi-squared analysis was conducted between GS residencies and fellowship programs in their corresponding years using Stata15 software.

RESULTS

In all years examined, fellowships in Vascular, Thoracic, and Plastic Surgery had significantly lower female enrollment in proportion to the number of female GS residents (p = <0.02). In all years examined, Surgical Oncology, Pediatric, Colon and Rectal, and Surgical Critical Care had female enrollment that was, at minimum, proportional to female enrollment in GS residency, indicating equitable gender representation. Surgical Oncology (2016), Pediatric (2020) and Surgical Critical Care (2016) fellowships each had 1 year where female enrollment was significantly higher than General Surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The enrollment of female surgeons in Plastic, Vascular, and Thoracic Surgery fellowships has not improved proportionally despite an increase in female GS residents. These results suggest the possibility of persistent factors that deter female enrollment in Vascular, Thoracic and Plastic Surgery fellowships that are not present to the same degree in fields with equitable fellowship female enrollment. Female representation in surgical fellowships is vital to improving gender diversity in all disciplines of surgery, particularly academic surgery.

Female authorship trends in the field of colorectal surgery: A retrospective bibliometric study

Background

Gender disparity and hidden discrimination remained in the surgical subspecialties. This study aimed to explore the authorship gender composition in four high-impact colorectal surgery journals over the past two decades.

Method

This cross-sectional study queried the Web of Science Core Collection database and PubMed (MEDLINE) for articles published in four high-impact colorectal surgery specialty journals between 2000 and 2021 (Database accessed at July 2022). Extracted data included authors' full names, institutions, year of publication and total citation numbers. Authors' genders were assigned via gendrize.io, a third-party name predictor tool.

Results

100,325 authorship records were included in the final analysis. 21.8% of writers were identified as female, an increase from 11.4% (95% CI, 9.4%-13.3%) in 2000 to 26.5% (95% CI, 25.6%-27.4%) in 2021. Female authorship has risen in all authorship types, but women physicians were less likely to be the last authors than the first (OR, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.6-0.67) or middle authors (OR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.55-0.60). Female authorship has also increased substantially in different document types, but female authorships were less likely in editorials than original articles (OR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.7-0.83) and reviews (OR, 0.83; 95%CI, 0.74-0.94). Compared with male physicians, females were more likely to author in publications with reportable funding, either as first authors (OR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.12-1.78) or last authors (OR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.22-1.89). Authorship varied geographically, and countries with the highest female authorship percentage were mainly in Europe and North America.

Conclusion

Female authorship has grown substantially in colorectal surgery literature. However, female physicians were still underrepresented and less likely to assume senior or leading authorship roles.

Gender Discrepancies in Middle Author Publications in US Academic General Surgery

INTRODUCTION

To explore gender discrepancies in publications at general surgery departments, we performed a cross-sectional comparing the number of women and men at each academic rank and their number of first author (FA), middle author (MA), last author (LA), and total publications.

METHODS

Thirty academic general surgery departments were randomly selected. For each faculty, we tabulated: first, middle, last names, gender, academic rank, educational leadership, year of medical school graduation, and additional graduate degrees. Bibliography, H-index, and citations were downloaded from the Scopus database.

RESULTS

One thousand three hundred twenty-six faculty sampled, 881 (66.4%) men and 445 (33.5%) women. Men outnumbered women at all ranks, with increasing disparity at higher ranks. Men outnumbered women in all subspecialties-largest difference in transplant surgery (84.4% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001). Men at all ranks had more MA publications: assistant professor (rate ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.43, P = 0.024), associate professor (1.65; 1.31-2.06, P < 0.001), and professor (1.50; 1.20-1.91, P = 0.008). Men associate professors had more LA publications (1.74; 1.34-2.37, P < 0.001). No differences found in FA publications at any rank, nor LA publications at assistant professor and professor ranks. At subspecialty level, men in surgical oncology (1.95; 1.55-2.45, P < 0.001) and transplant surgery (1.70; 1.09-2.66, P = 0.02) had more MA publications.

CONCLUSIONS

While FA and LA publications did not differ significantly across genders, the largest difference lies in MA publications, beginning at junior ranks and persisting with seniority. Discrepancies in MA publications may reflect gender discrepancies in collaborative opportunities, hence total publications should be used cautiously when determining academic productivity.

Analysis of gender representation, authorship inflation, and institutional affiliation in abstract acceptance: a 5-year study

Purpose

Our goals were to characterize associations of author number, author gender, and institutional affiliation on ratings and acceptances of abstracts submitted to one surgical education conference over 5 years.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all abstracts submitted between 2017 and 2021 to the annual meeting of the Association for Surgical Education (ASE). Abstract data included average rater scores, acceptance status, author lists, and institutional affiliations. We cross-referenced last author affiliation with top-40 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded institutions and used a gender determination software to code first and last author genders.

Results

We analyzed 1,162 abstracts. Higher reviewer scores demonstrated positive, weak associations with more authors [r(1160) = 0.191, p < 0.001] and institutions [r(1160) = 0.182, p < 0.001]. Significantly higher scores were noted for abstracts with last authors affiliated with top-40 NIH-funded institutions [4.18 (SD 0.96) vs. 3.72 (SD 1.12), p < 0.001]. Women were first authors (51.8%) (n = 602) and last authors (35.4%) (n = 411) of the time. Abstracts were rated significantly higher with women rather than men as first authors [3.98 (SD 0.99) vs. 3.82 (SD 1.12), p = 0.011] or last [4.01 (SD 1.04) vs. 3.82 (SD 1.10), p = 0.005]. Across all years, abstracts were accepted more often as podium or plenary presentations when submitted by women first [n = 279, 59.7% (p = 0.002)] or last [n = 183, 38.4% (p = 0.095)] authors.

Conclusion

Abstracts whose last authors were affiliated with top-40 NIH-funded institutions received significantly higher scores, possibly indicating increased tangible or intangible resources contributing to research efforts. Abstracts with women first and last authors scored higher and were more frequently invited for plenary and podium presentations.

Academic Global Surgery: Creating Opportunities, Equity, and Diversity

A workforce trained in the development and delivery of equitable surgical care is critical in reducing the global burden of surgical disease. Academic global surgery aims to address the present inequities through collaborative partnerships that foster research, education, advocacy and training to support and increase the surgical capacity in settings with limited resources. Barriers include a deficiency of resources, personnel, equipment, and funding, a lack of communication, and geographical challenges. Multi-level partnerships remain fundamental; these types of partnerships include a wide range of trainees, professionals, institutions, and nations, yet care must be taken to avoid falling into the trap of surgical "voluntourism" and undermining the expertise and practice of long-standing frontline providers. Academic global surgery has the benefit of developing a community of surgeons who possess the tools needed to collaborate on individual, institutional, and international levels to address inequities in surgery that are spread variously across the globe. However, challenges for surgeons pursuing a career in global surgery include balancing clinical responsibilities while integrating global surgery as a career during training. This is due in part to the lack of mentorship, research time, grant funding, support to attend conferences, and a limitation of resources, all of which are significantly more pronounced for surgeons from low-resource countries.

Gender differences and cooperation in medical authorships - an analysis of the recent ten years in five key medical disciplines

BACKGROUND

Career prospects in academic medicine are strongly linked to scientific authorship and this marker has been widely used as an indicator of gender equity in academia. However, direct comparisons of medical disciplines regarding their proportion of female physicians (FP) in different countries are missing. This study examines the gender parity and gender cooperation using first authorships (FA) and senior authorships (SA) of scientific publications in five medical disciplines and six different OECD countries over a 10-year time-trend.

METHODS

Articles from three high-impact journals in each of the medical discipline radiology, urology, surgery, gynecology, and pediatrics from the years 2007/8 and 2017/18 were retrospectively reviewed. The gender and affiliation location of the FA and SA of original research articles and reviews were assigned and compared with the proportion of in each discipline for the United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan. Mantel-Haenszel test and multinomial logistic regression models were used to calculate differences in proportions of women authors and FP and to assess trends and proportions of FA and SA.

RESULTS

30,803 articles were evaluated. Equally, with rising proportions of FP in all disciplines, the number of women authors increased across years. The shares of women FAs were either significantly higher (urology/surgery/gynecology) or balanced (pediatrics/radiology) compared to the proportion of FP. In contrast, the shares of women SA were balanced only in disciplines with a low proportion of FP (urology and surgery) and otherwise reduced. Women same-gender cooperation was as common as men same-gender cooperation and preferred over a women-led mixed gender cooperation in disciplines where this seemed to be practicable due to the high proportions of FP.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to FA, a significant disparity persists in SA, particularly in disciplines with a high proportion of FP. The discrepancy between FA and SA may reflect, among others, dropout from an academic career in early or mid-academic levels, for example, due to structural inequality; together with the findings on gender preference in authorship collaborations, this may inform future strategies for promoting equal career advancement for women physicians.

The persistent publication glass ceiling: an analysis of gender authorship trends in ANZ Journal of Surgery

BACKGROUND

women historically have been underrepresented in the field of academic publishing. This study aims to analyse ANZJS gender authorship trends and compare this to the proportion of women in surgery in Australia/NZ using RACS demographic data to provide parity context.

METHODS

This is a bibliographic gender analysis of ANZJS publications from 2002 to 2021; articles were analysed using a web-based application classifying gender from names.

RESULTS

There were 7265 articles analysed. Gender was predicted for 87% (6303/7265) first-, 89% (5847/6439) last- and 98% (323/329) editorial first-authors. There were 1269/6303 (20%) women first-authors, this increased from 14% to 27% (p = 0.001) over time. Eleven percent (654/5847) of last-authors were women, this proportion remained unchanged (p = 0.09). Eleven (3%) editorials were first-authored by women, with 3/329 (1%) as solo-author.

CONCLUSION

Numbers of women authors remain low in ANZJS, although the percentage of women first-authors has increased over time. However, if being last-author serves as a measure of senior academic supervision, and, editorial authorship shows leadership in one's field, women authors in these positions, in ANZJS, represent a small minority.

Analysis of Gender-Based Authorship Trends in Leading Pain-Medicine Journals Over 10 Years

Authorship of peer-reviewed publications is important for academic rank, promotion, and national reputation. In pain medicine, limited information is available for authorship trends for women as compared with men. The objective of this study was to describe trends of female authorship data in the 5 pain journals with the highest impact factors over a 10-year period. We analyzed data for January, April, and October in 2009, 2014, and 2019. For each article, the following information was recorded: journal name, journal month, journal year, article title or article PMCID, total authors, total female authors, total male authors, total authors of unknown gender, presence or absence of a female first author, and presence or absence of a female last/senior author. Authorship for 924 articles was reviewed. When a man was senior author, women were first author on only 27.9% of articles (P<.001). A woman was 2 times as likely (57.2%) to be first author when a woman was the senior author (P<.001), pointing to the potential impact of female senior authors. An article with 50% or more female authors was 76.4% more likely to have a female senior author (P<.001). The results demonstrate the influence of a senior female author on the likelihood of an article’s having a female first author. When men were the senior authors, women were half as likely to be first authors. The total number of female authors changed very little between 2009 and 2019.

Perceptions of Neurosurgery among Medical Students and Interns: A National Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Neurosurgery is considered one of the most admired surgical specializations. Still, as evidenced by observations over the years, it is not amongst the top choices of medical students in Saudi Arabia. This study will help in understanding the perception and attitudes of medical students and interns toward the neurosurgery specialization, which will aid in developing strategies to increase the interest of undergraduates in neurosurgery specialization and bridge the human resource gap in this vital specialty. Objectives: This study aimed to assess perceptions, attitudes, and gender differences of medical students and interns toward neurosurgery. The influence of demographic factors on perceptions of neurosurgery of interns and senior medical students in Saudi Arabia was also investigated. Methodology: We conducted a cross-sectional study on a convenience sample of medical students (clinical years) and interns studying in different colleges of medicine in Saudi Arabia. A total of 1014 responses were included in this study (518 males and 496 females). The questionnaire comprised of two parts: the first part carried general descriptive questions, while the second part had 24-item Likert scale-based questions. Results: Around 40% of medical students and 26% of interns agreed or strongly agreed to the statement ‘I would consider a career in neurosurgery. Around 70% of both interns and students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘Huge prestige is attached to neurosurgery’. The responses to the statement ‘Neurosurgery is a male specialty’ was significantly different between genders, as 36.5% of the male respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement while just 12.5% of the females responded likewise (p = 0.000). Only 23% of participants reported having completed a rotation in neurosurgery. About 44.7% of respondents were interested in taking an elective rotation in neurosurgery, while the remaining respondents (55.3%) responded with a negative answer. Only 23% of participants had completed an undergraduate rotation in neurosurgery. More males (65.3%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘Work as a neurosurgery specialist can impede family life as compared to females (57.5%), which was highly significant (p = 0.000). More medical students (45.1%) responded in the agreement or strong agreement in response to the statement’ Neurosurgery should be a compulsory rotation during internship’ as compared to interns (25.8%). Around 65% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that teachers/seniors have a great influence on students’ specialization choices. Around 67% of the respondents foresaw a purely clinical role for themselves after graduation, while 17% were interested in a clinical–academician role. Conclusions: The study reflected a generally positive attitude towards neurosurgery amongst medical students and interns. Interest in neurosurgery as a specialization can be strengthened by enhancing the exposure of students and interns to the specialty. Teachers and seniors can be useful influencers to motivate students to consider neurosurgery specialization.

Gender Distribution & Rank of Authorship in Surgical Literature

BACKGROUND

Authorship of surgical literature is important for the career advancement of surgeons, and gender disparities in authorship may hinder the representation and leadership of women within academic surgery. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the gender distribution of first, senior, and overall authorship in peer-reviewed surgical journal studies across all surgical specialties to determine if disparities exist.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies investigating the gender distribution of authorship of surgical literature published before December 10th, 2021. Meta-analysis was performed and Cohen's Q test for heterogenous effects was used to determine whether random or fixed-effects models were appropriate.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies investigating gender distribution of authorship met inclusion, which included a total of 136,627 pooled studies. The meta-analysis demonstrated the meta-proportion of first authorship for women to be 20.6% (95% CI: 13.9, 28.2), the meta-proportion of senior authorship for women to be 11.9% (95% CI: 6.6, 18.5), and the meta-proportion of overall authorship for women to be 23% (95% CI: 16.2, 30.7). In addition, the proportion of senior authorship for women was found to be significantly lower than the proportion of overall authorship for women (11.9% versus 23.0%, P = .0106).

CONCLUSION

There is a significantly smaller proportion of women who are first, senior, and overall authors in surgical literature compared to their colleagues who are men. Sustainable and effective solutions aimed at improving the representation of women surgeons in surgical research and research leadership are necessary.

Assessing the gender gap in musculoskeletal radiology authorship across three continents: are really the "ladies first"?

AIM

To assess gender-specific authorship trends in musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology in three major radiology journals, Skeletal Radiology (SR), Clinical Radiology (CR) and Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging (IJRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of articles pertaining to MSK radiology was done for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 for SR and CR and for the years 2010 and 2020 for IJRI. The number and positions of female authors was noted.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-five articles were reviewed after excluding the articles where the gender of one or more authors could not be conclusively determined. In SR, the percentage of female authors increased significantly from 4% in 2000 to 17% in 2010 (p<0.0001) and to 21.9% in 2020 (p<0.0001) with an increase in the percentage of first female authors from 0.8% in 2000 to 4.9% in 2010 and further to 5.4% in 2020. In CR, the percentage of female authors reduced from 13.8% in 2000 to 13.6% in 2010 (p=0.9798 and further reduced to 7% in 2020 (p=0.1592). In IJRI, the percentage of articles with no female authors went down from 36.4% (2010) to 26.7% (2020).

CONCLUSION

There is an upward trend in female authorship in MSK radiology related articles in SR and IJRI with continued under-representation in CR. The first and middle order female authors have shown a significant increase, although the number of last female authors remains very low. Analysis of such trends in academic journals from other subspecialities in medicine needs to be undertaken to confirm or refute the findings of this study.

Early Barriers to Career Progression of Women in Surgery and Solutions to Improve Them: A Systematic Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to summarize the evidence concerning the barriers that exist to the career progression of women in surgery and to provide potential solutions to overcome these obstacles.

BACKGROUND

Visible and invisible impediments can hinder female doctors' pursuit of a surgical career, from choosing a surgical specialty to training opportunities and all the way through career progression.

METHODS

Database search of original studies about barriers for female surgeons during choice of surgical career, residency, and career progression. A query including possible solutions such as mentorship and network was included.

RESULTS

Of 4618 total articles; 4497 were excluded as duplicates, having incorrect study focus, or not being original studies; leaving 120 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Of the articles included, 22 (18%) focused on factors affecting the pursuit of a surgical career, such as surgical work hours and limited time for outside interests, 55 (46%) analyzed the main barriers that exist during surgical residency and fellowship training, such as discrimination and sexual harassment, 27 (23%) focused on barriers to career advancement, heavy workloads, ineffective mentorship, unclear expectations for advancement, inequality in pay or work-home conflicts. Among studies reporting on possible solutions, 8 (6.5%) articles reported on the role of effective mentorship to support career advancement and to provide moral support and 8 (6.5%) on the emerging role of social media for networking. Our analysis showed how different impediments hinder surgical career progression for women, with notable consequences on burnout and attrition.

CONCLUSIONS

Identification and recognition of obstacles to career progression is the first step to addressing the gender gap in surgery. Active strategies should be improved to promote a culture of diversity and to create equal opportunity for women in surgery, while implementing structured mentoring programs and investing on an adequate communication on social media to engage the future generations.

Scholarly Output in Peruvian National Dentistry according to Gender Disparity: A 10-Year Bibliometric Study

Objective. To evaluate Peruvian scientific publications in dentistry according to sex disparity (2011-2020). Methods. This was a retrospective bibliometric study. The unit of analysis was made up of Peruvian dentistry publications indexed in the Scopus database during the last 10 years. Records with metadata (410) corresponding to the period 2011-2020 were downloaded and standardized and refined by analyzing the metadata. The search strategy was developed based on the individual profiles of each Peruvian institution that has a dental school or college. It was evaluated according to the AF-ID of each institution in the Scopus database. In addition, the information provided by the Scopus SciVal tool was used. Finally, publications, impact, and collaboration indicators were used, such as total number per document, per author, average of citations, $h$ -index, collaboration rate, number of institutions, the Source Normalized Impact per Paper indicator, the CiteScore, and the Scopus Field-Weighted Citation Impact. Results. The greatest increase was evident in 2018, with 2019 and 2020 being the maximum peak of scientific publication growth. However, sustained growth has not been evidenced in relation to the female sex. The analysis of coauthorship by the authors revealed four large clusters, of which the first three were represented by male researchers, such as Arriola-Guillen L., Mayta-Tovalino F., and Mendoza-Azpur G., and one by a female, Guerrero María E. Evaluating the national scientific publication in dentistry according to the CiteScore, it was found that most of the publications (145) from Peru were published in Q4 journals, although 90 manuscripts were published in Q1 journals. Conclusions. The Peruvian national dental publication in the last 10 years was mainly supported by male dentists, which invites us to reflect on the need to equalize opportunities so that female researchers can also reduce these gaps.

Gender imbalance in gynecologic oncology authorship and impact of COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Despite increased participation of women in academic medicine in recent decades, gender disparities persist. The gender gap in authorship and editorial boards in gynecologic oncology, and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, have not been recently evaluated. We examined gender representation and the impact of COVID-19 on authorship and editorial boards of two major peer-reviewed gynecologic oncology journals.

METHODS

We conducted a bibliometric analysis of original articles published in Gynecologic Oncology and the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, comparing the most contemporary 5-year period (2016-2020) to single years in the two prior decades (1996, 2006). To assess the early impact of COVID-19, we compared publications from May 2020-April 2021 to 2019. Editorial boards were analyzed for gender composition. First names, pronouns, and institutional photographs were used to determine gender.

RESULTS

There were 3022 original articles published between 2016 and 2020, 763 in 2006, and 203 in 1996. Gender was identified for 91.3% of first authors (3641 articles) and 95.6% of senior authors (3813 articles). Men comprised the majority of the editorial boards in 2021 at 57% and 61% for Gynecologic Oncology and the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, respectively. Men were overrepresented as senior authors across all study periods: 93% in 1996, 77% in 2006, and 58% in 2016-2020. Over time, representation of women as first and senior authors increased (7% in 1996, 42% in 2016-2020, p<0.00001). There was no immediate impact of the early pandemic on gender distribution of authorship.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite greater representation of women over time as authors in gynecologic oncology journals, there remains gender disparity in senior authorship and editorial board representation. This presents an opportunity for the academic publishing community to advocate for deliberate strategies to achieve gender parity. Although no impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic was found, this requires ongoing surveillance.

Academic medicine's glass ceiling: Author's gender in top three medical research journals impacts probability of future publication success

INTRODUCTION

In December 2017, Lancet called for gender inequality investigations. Holding other factors constant, trends over time for significant author (i.e., first, second, last or any of these authors) publications were examined for the three highest-impact medical research journals (i.e., New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], and Lancet).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using randomly sampled 2002-2019 MEDLINE original publications (n = 1,080; 20/year/journal), significant author-based and publication-based characteristics were extracted. Gender assignment used internet-based biographies, pronouns, first names, and photographs. Adjusting for author-specific characteristics and multiple publications per author, generalized estimating equations tested for first, second, and last significant author gender disparities.

RESULTS

Compared to 37.23% of 2002 - 2019 U.S. medical school full-time faculty that were women, women's first author publication rates (26.82% overall, 15.83% NEJM, 29.38% Lancet, and 35.39% JAMA; all p < 0.0001) were lower. No improvements over time occurred in women first authorship rates. Women first authors had lower Web of Science citation counts and co-authors/collaborating author counts, less frequently held M.D. or multiple doctoral-level degrees, less commonly published clinical trials or cardiovascular-related projects, but more commonly were North American-based and studied North American-based patients (all p < 0.05). Women second and last authors were similarly underrepresented. Compared to men, women first authors had lower multiple publication rates in these top journals (p < 0.001). Same gender first/last authors resulted in higher multiple publication rates within these top three journals (p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Since 2002, this authorship "gender disparity chasm" has been tolerated across all these top medical research journals. Despite Lancet's 2017 call to arms, furthermore, the author-based gender disparities have not changed for these top medical research journals - even in recent times. Co-author gender alignment may reduce future gender inequities, but this promising strategy requires further investigation.

Gender Disparity in the Citation of Surgical Research

BACKGROUND

Women surgeons face numerous barriers to career advancement. Inequitable citation of surgical literature may represent a contributing factor to gender disparities in academic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analysis of publications from 50 top-ranking surgery journals in 2017 and 2018, as defined by the 2019 InCites Journal Citation Reports. The citation rate of publications by women vs men first authors was compared. Similarly, the citation rate of publications by men vs women last authors was also compared. Adjusted regression analyses of citation rates accounted for the time interval since publication as well as the journal within which the article was published, among other potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 19,084 publications from 48 surgery journals with a median (interquartile range) of 8 (4 to 15) citations contributing to a median (interquartile range) Journal Impact Factor of 4.0 (3.4 to 4.6) were analyzed. Compared with man-first author publications, woman-first author publications demonstrated a 9% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.91, p < 0.001). Similarly, compared with publications by man-last authors, woman-last author publications demonstrated a 4% lower citation rate (incidence rate ratio 0.96, p = 0.03). These associations persisted after multivariable adjustment for additional confounding factors, however, not on sensitivity analysis of 24 of the highest-ranking journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Among top-tier surgical journals, publications by women-first and -last authors were less cited compared with publications by men-first and -last authors, but not among the highest-tier surgical journals. Gender bias may exist in the citation of surgical research, contributing to gender disparities in academic surgery.

Discrimination Towards Women in Surgery: A Systematic Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Over the past twenty years explicit gender bias towards women in surgery has been replaced by more subtle barriers, which represent indirect forms of discrimination and prevents equality.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our scoping review is to summarize the different forms of discrimination towards women in surgery.

METHODS

The database search consisted of original studies regarding discrimination towards female surgeons.

RESULTS

Of 3,615 studies meeting research criteria, 63 were included. Of these articles, 11 (18%) were focused on gender-based discrimination, 14 (22%) on discrimination in authorship, research productivity and research funding, 21 (33%) on discrimination in academic surgery, 7 (11%) on discrimination in surgical leadership positions and 10 (16%) on discrimination during conferences and in surgical societies. The majority (n = 53, 84%) of the included studies were conducted in the U.S.A. According to our analysis, female surgeons experience discrimination from male colleagues, healthcare workers, but also from patients and trainees. Possible solutions may include acknowledgement of the problem, increased education of diversity and integration for the younger generations, mentorship, coaching and more active engagement by male and female partners to support women in the surgical field.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender-based discrimination toward women in the field of surgery has evolved over the past twenty years, from an explicit to a more subtle attitude. A work-environment where diversity and flexibility are valued would allow female surgeons to better realize their full potential.

Career barriers for women in surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing numbers of female medical students, surgery remains male-dominated.

PURPOSE

To highlight the principal career obstacles experienced by aspiring female surgeons.

METHODS

A narrative review of literature on the position and career barriers of female surgeons has been conducted, using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases.

MAIN FINDINGS

Implicit and even explicit biases against female surgeons remain prevalent, negatively impacting their training performance and overall professional trajectory. Female surgeons are globally underrepresented in leadership positions and senior academic rankings, especially that of a full professor. They feel hampered by lack of effective mentorship, whose value for a successful career has been acknowledged by all medical students, surgeons and surgical leaders. Their work-life imbalance is sometimes expressed as lower likelihood than their male contemporaries of getting married or having children and may be attributed to their conventional association with the role of caretaker, their personal desire to accommodate occupational and family duties and the inadequate implementation of parental leave and childcare policies. Female surgeons' "infertility" may be further explained by direct and indirect pregnancy-related difficulties. Female surgeons are also financially undercompensated compared to their male contemporaries. Finally, specialty-specific challenges should not be overlooked.

CONCLUSIONS

While encouraging steps have been made, women in surgery feel still hindered by various obstacles. The qualitative, interview-based nature of current literature requires more meticulous studies on these barriers with a more quantitative and objective approach. Attenuation of gender imbalance in surgical specialties requires further changes in mentality and more targeted modifications in relevant policies.

Is authorship by women in Brazilian academic surgery increasing? A five-year retrospective analysis

Women remain underrepresented in 80% of Brazilian surgical specialties, however, women representation within the Brazilian academic surgical literature remains unknown. This study aims to evaluate the gender distribution of first and last authors in Brazilian surgical journals. All publications between 2015 and 2019 from the five Brazilian surgical journals with the highest impact factor were reviewed. The first and last authors' names were extracted from each article and a predictive algorithm was used to classify the gender of each author. Authors were further classified by surgical field and geographic region to investigate patterns of female authorship among journals, specialties, and region over the study period. Multivariable logistic regression was then used to identify factors independently associated with female authorship. 1844 articles were analyzed; 23% (426/1844) articles had female first authors, and 20% (348/1748) had female last authors. Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira was observed to have the highest rates for both first and last female authors (37%, 138/371; 26%, 95/370)) and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (9%, 48/542; 10%, 54/522) had the lowest rates. Papers with a woman senior author were twice as likely to have a woman first author (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.51-2.58, p≤0.01). Women's representation in medicine is increasing in Brazil, yet women remain underrepresented as the first and last authors in the Brazilian surgical literature. Our results highlight the importance of senior women mentorship in academic surgery and demonstrate that promoting female surgeon senior authorship through academic and financial support will positively impact the number of female first authors.

Lack of residents due to COVID-19 pandemic. Can a mentor–mentee program during medical studies have a positive influence on the choice for specialist training in gynecology and obstetrics? A review of current literature and results of a national wide survey of medical students

Objective

The COVID-19 pandemic restricting clinical practice and exacerbating the lack of medical staff. There is currently a lack of young residents who are deciding on further training in gynecology and obstetrics. Design: review and prospective, cross-sectional study. Setting: the aim of this study was to investigate if structured mentoring programs can counteract this deficiency. Population: medical students took part from Germany in the clinical phase.

Methods

An anonymous questionnaire was developed and distributed to students from January to October 2020. Epidemiological data, questions about mentoring experiences, necessity and their expected influence on career planning were collected and statistically evaluated. Main outcome measures: structured mentoring-programs can influence the choice of subject. In particular, men are still underrepresented. Research on the topic of mentoring during in the field of gynaecology and obstetrics is completely lacking.

Results

A representative number of 927 medical students took part in the survey. 22% (170/906) of the students had already participated in a mentoring program with a significantly higher proportion of men (69%; 117/170; p < 0.001). Of these, 94% (453/170) said this was helpful. 6% (55/906) wanted to pursue a career in gynecology and obstetrics. When asked about their appreciation for structured mentoring programs in gynecology and obstetrics, 95% (880/906) would participate and 94% agreed (871/906) that this could have an impact on their choice of specialist and career planning.

Conclusions

An active provision of mentoring programs and more content can be a way of counteracting the shortage of residents in gynecology and obstetrics.

Gender Equity of Promoting Practices in Academic Neurosurgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

Women have historically been underrepresented in academic medicine, particularly in surgical subspecialties. This study investigated potential associations between gender and promoting practices in academic neurosurgery.

METHODS

Faculty data, including time from residency, professorship, specialty, and h-index, were obtained from websites of the institutions listed in the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Neurosurgical Residency Training Program Directory. Demographics, training, and appointments were compared between male and female neurosurgeons. Predictors of professorship, chair, directorship, and division leadership were identified using multivariable models.

RESULTS

The study examined 1629 faculty members. Women were more likely to be assistant professors (P < 0.0001), while men were more likely to be full professors (P < 0.0001), hold chair positions (P = 0.007), lead subspecialty divisions (P = 0.008), and have a higher Scopus h-index (P < 0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, years from training (P < 0.001), fellowship (P = 0.009), h-index (P < 0.001), and chair/program director/division leadership position (P < 0.001) were significant positive predictors of full professorship. Holding additional advanced degrees (P = 0.010), leading a subspecialty division (P = 0.005), and having a higher h-index (P = 0.002) positively predicted chair position. However, when accounting for all other factors, gender was not a significant predictor of full professorship, division leadership, chair, or program directorship.

CONCLUSIONS

While significantly more men hold leadership positions in U.S. academic institutions, after controlling for contributing variables, there did not appear to be an association between gender and full professorship, division leadership, chair, or program directorship in academic neurosurgery. While the field still has significant work to do to achieve gender equity, these results may serve as encouragement to women who are looking to advance their careers in academic neurosurgery.

The sticky surgical floor: An analysis of female authorship trends in vascular surgery

OBJECTIVE

Prior research in vascular surgery has identified significant gender disparities in leadership positions, but few data exist regarding gender disparities in vascular publications. This study aims to evaluate authorship trends by gender in the three highest impact factor vascular surgery journals.

METHODS

In this bibliometric analysis, PubMed was searched for articles published in the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, the Journal of Vascular Surgery, and Annals of Vascular Surgery from 2015 to 2019. The web-based application Genderize used predictive algorithms to classify names of first and last authors as male or female. Statistical analyses regarding trends in authorship were performed using Stata16.

RESULTS

A total of 6457 articles were analyzed, with first author gender predicted with >90% confidence in 83% (4889/5796) and last author gender in 88% (5078/5796). Overall, 25% (1223/4889) of articles had women first authors, and 10% (501/5078) had women last authors. From 2015 to 2019, there was a slight increase in the proportion of articles written by women first authors (P = .001), but no increase in the proportion of articles written by women last authors (P = .204). The proportion of articles written by women last authors was lower than the proportion of active women vascular surgeons in 2015 (8% of articles vs 11% of surgeons; P = .015), 2017 (9% of articles vs 13% of surgeons; P < .001), and 2019 (11% of articles vs 15% of practicing surgeons; P < .001). The average number of last-author publications was higher for men (2.35 ± 3.76) than for women (1.62 ± 1.88, P = .001). The proportion of unique authors who were women was less than the proportion of active women vascular surgeons in 2017 (10% unique authors vs 13% surgeons; P = .047), but not in 2015 (9% unique authors vs 11% surgeons; P = .192) or 2019 (13% unique authors vs 15% surgeons; P = .345). Notably, a woman last author was associated with 1.45 higher odds of having a woman first author (95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.79; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past 5 years, there has been no significant increase in women last authors among top-tier journals in vascular surgery. Women remain under-represented as last authors in terms of proportion of published articles, but not in terms of proportion of unique authors. Nevertheless, women last authors are more likely to publish with women first authors, indicating the importance of women-led mentorship in achieving publication gender equity. Support for women surgeons through grants and promotions is essential not only for advancing last authorship gender equity, but for advancing junior faculty and trainee academic careers.

Gender Disparity in Abstract Presentation at Plastic Surgery Meetings

BACKGROUND

Medical and surgical fields continue to be marred by gender disparities. The "leaky pipeline" effect, representing a gradual decline in female representation along the academic ladder, has been well documented in plastic surgery. However, gender differences in abstract presentation at national plastic surgery meetings and subsequent publications remains elusive.

METHODS

We reviewed abstracts presented at the 2014 and 2015 annual meetings of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons (AAPS); American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), and the Plastic Surgery Research Council (PSRC). Several abstract characteristics including the names of the first and last authors were extracted. Genderize.io and Google search were used to identify the authors' gender.

RESULTS

We identified 1174 abstracts presented at the three identified meetings. Females comprised 29% of the presenters and 16% of abstract senior authors (ASAs). No gender differences were identified between the meetings, type of presentation (oral versus poster), and year of presentation. The only difference was in the subspecialty of the abstracts. Successful conversion to full-text articles was similar for male and female presenters (68% versus 62%, P = 0.065) but higher for male ASAs (68% versus 59%, P = 0.01). When an author change occurred, female presenters and ASAs were more likely to be replaced by males (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Gender differences continue to be evident in academic plastic surgery with women constituting a minority of both presenters and senior authors on abstracts presented at national plastic surgery meetings. Future work should assess whether flexible and supportive work policies can foster greater female representation in academic plastic surgery.

Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years

Publication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A p < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985-1987 to 23.7% in 2015-2016. There were more female 1^st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1^st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.

Gender disparities in Ecuador: a survey study of the under-representation of women in surgery

The aim of this study is to describe the state of gender representation in surgery across Ecuador. A survey of female surgeons in Ecuador was conducted, collecting information regarding demographics, academics, family and relationships, sexual harassment, discrimination and gender preference of one's own surgeon. All statistical analysis was conducted with IBM-SPSS version 25. The platform, Worlde, was used for discourse analysis. Of the 144 female surgeons who received the survey, 105 responded. Almost half of respondents had a higher degree in addition to their surgical training. Leadership positions in the workplace were reported to be held by males in 66.7% of cases. Relationship problems caused by the surgical profession were reported by 72.4% of respondents. Feelings of guilt for not dedicating enough time to family were reported by 72.4%, and a feeling of not being supported by their partner was reported by 31.4% of respondents. Sexual harassment was described by 55.2%, and discrimination by 48.6% of the female surgeons in our sample. The majority (89.5%) would choose surgery again if given the opportunity. Significant gender disparities remain within the surgical community in Ecuador.

The experiences of female surgeons around the world: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The Lancet Commission for Global Surgery identified an adequate surgical workforce as one indicator of surgical care accessibility. Many countries where women in surgery are underrepresented struggle to meet the recommended 20 surgeons per 100,000 population. We evaluated female surgeons' experiences globally to identify strategies to increase surgical capacity through women.

METHODS

Three database searches identified original studies examining female surgeon experiences. Countries were grouped using the World Bank income level and Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI).

RESULTS

Of 12,914 studies meeting search criteria, 139 studies were included and examined populations from 26 countries. Of the accepted studies, 132 (95%) included populations from high-income countries (HICs) and 125 (90%) exclusively examined populations from the upper 50% of GGGI ranked countries. Country income and GGGI ranking did not independently predict gender equity in surgery. Female surgeons in low GGGI HIC (Japan) were limited by familial support, while those in low income, but high GGGI countries (Rwanda) were constrained by cultural attitudes about female education. Across all populations, lack of mentorship was seen as a career barrier. HIC studies demonstrate that establishing a critical mass of women in surgery encourages female students to enter surgery. In HICs, trainee abilities are reported as equal between genders. Yet, HIC women experience discrimination from male co-workers, strain from pregnancy and childcare commitments, and may suffer more negative health consequences. Female surgeon abilities were seen as inferior in lower income countries, but more child rearing support led to fewer women delaying childbearing during training compared to North Americans and Europeans.

CONCLUSION

The relationship between country income and GGGI is complex and neither independently predict gender equity. Cultural norms between geographic regions influence the variability of female surgeons' experiences. More research is needed in lower income and low GGGI ranked countries to understand female surgeons' experiences and promote gender equity in increasing the number of surgical providers.

Closing the Gender Gap in Global Surgery: Trends at the Academic Surgical Congress

INTRODUCTION

Female researchers are underrepresented in academic surgery. While they are increasingly producing original research, they lag male researchers in productivity. This disparity is not well understood within the nascent field of global surgery. The following study examines gender parity in global surgery research presented at the Academic Surgical Congress and within subsequent publications.

METHODS

Abstracts presented at the Academic Surgical Congress (ASC) between 2015 and 2019 in "Global Surgery" sessions were reviewed to obtain title, the first author (FA) and senior author (SA). The authors were classified by gender. The Scopus database was queried by two reviewers for abstracts with corresponding publications, citations, and journal impact factors. Statistical analysis was conducted using chi-square analysis and t-tests where appropriate.

RESULTS

Of a total of 6635 abstracts, 218 global surgery abstracts over a 5-year period were identified. Of these abstracts, 96 (44%) had female FAs, while 56 (26%) had female SAs. When comparing gender, female (44%) FAs and male (56%) FAs were equally represented. While SAs were significantly less likely to be female (26% versus 74%, P < 0.0001), female senior authorship increased significantly within the study period. Output with respect to publications, citations, and journal impact factors were equal by gender.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents 5 y of gender trends in global surgery scholarly work presented at the ASC. Despite an overall predominance of male senior authors, the paradigm is shifting with a recent trend to gender parity. Male and female authors have equal output and are equally impactful. Findings of gender equity in academic global surgery are encouraging, and further study of other disciplines are warranted.