Gender in authorship and editorship in medical education journals: A bibliometric review

A Medical Education Research Library: key research topics and associated experts

When clinician-educators and medical education researchers use and discuss medical education research, they can advance innovation in medical education as well as improve its quality. To facilitate the use and discussions of medical education research, we created a prefatory visual representation of key medical education research topics and associated experts. We conducted one-on-one virtual interviews with medical education journal editorial board members to identify what they perceived as key medical education research topics as well as who they associated, as experts, with each of the identified topics. We used content analysis to create categories representing key topics and noted occurrences of named experts. Twenty-one editorial board members, representing nine of the top medical education journals, participated. From the data we created a figure entitled, Medical Education Research Library. The library includes 13 research topics, with assessment as the most prevalent. It also notes recognized experts, including van der Vleuten, ten Cate, and Norman. The key medical education research topics identified and included in the library align with what others have identified as trends in the literature. Selected topics, including workplace-based learning, equity, diversity, and inclusion, physician wellbeing and burnout, and social accountability, are emerging. Once transformed into an open educational resource, clinician-educators and medical education researchers can use and contribute to the functional library. Such continuous expansion will generate better awareness and recognition of diverse perspectives. The functional library will help to innovate and improve the quality of medical education through evidence-informed practices and scholarship.

Gender authorship in major American and European gastroenterology journals: the gap is still unfilled

BACKGROUND

The gender gap in the authorship of scientific research may affect career advancement. Our aim was to assess the potential gender gap in gastrointestinal (GI) journals.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of the GI literature and ongoing research in the period 2020-2022. A total 10 GI journals and ongoing research on clinicaltrials.gov were selected for review. The gender gap in first and senior authorship was evaluated for each article and ongoing research project. Associations between the gender gap and possible predictors were measured and results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95%CI.

RESULTS

The number of first female authors (FFAs) and senior female authors (SFAs) in published articles were 1408/4207 (33.5%) and 911/4207 (21.7%), respectively. There were 781/2654 (29.4%) female principal investigators (PI)s for the ongoing research. On comparison of non-endoscopic vs. endoscopic topics, the latter were associated with the gender gap (hepatology, OR 2.15 [95%CI 1.83-2.55]; inflammatory bowel disease, OR 2.12 [95%CI 1.60-2.45]; upper and lower GI, OR 1.31 [95%CI 1.18-1.73]); as well as the type of article (original article vs. editorial, OR 1.92 [95%CI 1.58-2.33]). The type of research was also associated with the gender gap (clinical vs. preclinical studies, OR 0.88 [95%CI 0.66-0.91]).

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated a correlation between the gender gap and the design and topic of the research. Future strategies for improving equity in career development in GI endoscopy should focus on closing the gender gap in equity of authorship.

Gender equity in The Journal of the American Dental Association: A review of the past 2 plus decades

BACKGROUND

Considering evidence of closing the gender gap in dental scholarship, this study assessed women's participation as authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board for The Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) from 2000 through 2022.

METHODS

The study authors downloaded author names from PubMed and retrieved names of reviewers and editorial board members from JADA's pages. The authors used Gender-API software to determine gender on the basis of first names. They used logistic regression to test for trends.

RESULTS

From January 2000 through December 2022, there were 2,935 full-length articles, 2,775 reviewers, 4 editors in chief, and 85 editorial board members. The percentage of women authors increased by 1.2% annually (95% CI, 1.03% to 1.33%), reaching 47% in 2022. First authorship increased by 2.1% annually (95% CI, 1.84% to 2.39%) and has been at more than 50% since 2016. In articles with multiple authors, there was a modest increase; second authorship increased 0.7% annually (95% CI, 0.36% to 1.09%) and last authorship by 0.7% (95% CI, 0.03% to 1.00%). Women reviewers increased 0.8% annually (95% CI, 0.68% to 0.97%), but the percentage of women on the editorial board did not increase significantly and was 41% in 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

It was anticipated that 50% of JADA authors would be women by 2024. However, women are still underrepresented on the editorial board. A comprehensive effort is needed to foster role models, provide mentorship opportunities for women, and support women's professional advancement in dental research and publications.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Gender-based disparities affect women in dental education and clinical practice. Serving as an editorial board member, reviewer, or author can affect academic promotion and the type of scientific investigation being conducted and indirectly affects women's health outcomes.

Scholarly Activity and Gender of an Applicant for a General Surgery Residency

INTRODUCTION

Applying to general surgery residency is undoubtedly a competitive process. Participation in scholarly activity (SCA) has been cited as a criterion when selecting applicants for interview and in the ranking process. This study aims to evaluate the association between gender of applicants to surgery residency and SCA and to characterize trends in SCAs over time.

METHODS

We analyzed the SCA of applicants interviewed at a general surgery residency program over 6-interview cycles (2016-2021). Eight SCA categories were included: (1) Poster Presentation, (2) Oral Presentation, (3) Peer-Reviewed (PR) Journal Articles/Abstracts, (4) PR Journal Articles/Abstracts (Other than Published), (5) PR Online Publication, (6) PR Book Chapter, (7) Nonpeer reviewed Online Publication, and (8) Other Articles/Scientific Monograph.

RESULTS

Of a total of 335 interviewed applicants, 288 (86%) had at least one count of SCA. Overall, no difference between male and female applicants was noticed (n = 178, 84.8% versus n = 110, 88%, P = 0.409) and no change in percentage of SCA over the six cycles (P = 0.239). The most reported SCAs were poster presentations (n = 242, 72.2%), oral presentations (n = 159, 47.5%), PR journal articles/abstracts (n = 159, 47.5%). Female applicants have marginally higher median (interquartile range) for SCAs compared to male applicants (5 [3, 8] versus 4 [3, 8], P value 0.272).

CONCLUSIONS

No association between gender and SCA among applicants for general surgery residency positions was observed. While more than three-fourths of applicants have at least one SCA, only a small fraction of applicants were published. Students should be made aware of the importance of SCA early in graduate medical education.

Gender gap-Gender-specific development in the field of obstetrics and gynecology in Germany in the last 20 years

Background

Gender Gap refers to differences between men and women in terms of access to medical education, career development, and leadership positions in medical practice and research. Although women now make up most medical school graduates in many countries, they are often underrepresented in higher positions.

Objective

The aim of this study is therefore to analyze the gender-specific development in the field of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Germany over the past 20 years and to survey the current status quo.

Materials and methods

An narrative review was carried out on the development of female graduates of human medicine, the proportion of women in contract medical care and clinical care, as well as the gender-specific evaluation of obtaining a gynecological/obstetric additional qualification. habilitation figures in the field of Obstetrics and Gynecology were evaluated about gender distribution. All data were received from federal institutes.

Results

A total of 46.7% (n = 95,234) of all inpatient doctors were female. A total of 46.7% (n = 95,234) of the physicians in hospitals were female. A total of 46% (1,832/3,958) were the portion of females as assistant physicians, 39.8% (n = 45.551) as specialists, 35.3% (n = 18789) as senior physicians, 25.1% (n = 2394) as first senior physicians and 25% (n = 10) as chief physicians in hospital. A total of 64.6% (n = 3958) of the physicians in Obstetrics and Gynecology were female. A total of 46% (1,832/3,958) were the portion of females as assistant physicians, 64.6% (n = 3958) as specialists, 65.0% (n = 1919) as senior physicians, 26.4% (n = 207) first senior physicians and 25% (n = 10) as chief physicians in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Discussion

The problem with the gender gap in medicine, does not seem to be access to teaching or starting a residency. But in the functions with increasing responsibility and management functions, e.g., as senior physicians, women are already rarely seen. In Obstetrics and Gynecology, too, there is a shortage of women in leading positions, despite the relatively high numbers, for example as senior physicians. Factors like maternity and establishing a family are points mentioned therefore, but also stereotypes seem to be considerable facts.

Conclusion

However, it is important to recognize the need for more women in higher positions in medicine and actively work to encourage more women to choose a career in medicine.

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 Disparities in First Authorship in Publications Related to Attention Deficit Hyperkinetic Disorder (ADHD) and Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The medical profession has experienced a significant increase in the number of women practitioners in recent decades, leading to a reduction in the gender gap. According to the United States Medical Association, approximately 25% of physicians in the United States are now women. Although this progress is evident in the clinical setting, women's representation in academic medicine remains disproportionately low. The underrepresentation of women in academia has various consequences, including limited access to academic resources and hindered career growth. Previous studies have attempted to analyze these disparities, but results have been inconsistent, and the issue's complexity has not been fully understood. This study aims to examine the disparity in the gender of first authors in academic publications related to " Artificial intelligence (AI) and Attention Deficit Hyperkinetic Disorder (ADHD)" between 2010 and 2023. Analysis was conducted on June 21st, 2023, using the database PubMed. The search term "AI" AND "ADHD" was used to derive all articles over a period of 13 years, from January 1st, 2010, to December 31st, 2022, excluding the year 2023 due to limited available publications. The relevant articles were downloaded in Microsoft Excel sheets. The gender of the first authors was determined using the NamSor app V.2, an application programming interface (API) with a large dataset of names and countries of origin. A total of 204 articles were considered for this study. There were 78 female first authors and 126 male first authors. The highest number of publications with a male first author occurred in 2022, with 32 publications. The Netherlands, Singapore, Turkey, and China have the highest gender ratios, indicating a more favourable representation of both genders. The p-value of 0.2664 suggests that there is no significant association between gender and country. The findings revealed a gender disparity, with a higher number of male first authors. By addressing and rectifying these disparities, we can enhance the overall quality, diversity, and inclusivity of research in the field of ADHD and Artificial Intelligence.

Female Authorship and Ophthalmology Journal Editorial Board Membership Trends Over the Last Decade, 2012-2021

PURPOSE

To study the relationship between female authorship and editorial board membership in 3 ophthalmology journals from 2012 to 2021.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional and trend study.

METHODS

The prevalence of female first, senior authorship, and editorial board members were examined in Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, and American Journal of Ophthalmology. Gender-API assigned gender to authors based on name and country. Editorial board (EB) information was manually extracted and grouped for comparison among leadership positions. Gender data collected on authorship and EB membership were compared. The proportion of women in EB positions was identified: editor-in-chief, mid-level editors, and consulting editors. Relationship between female authorship and editorial board membership was analyzed.

RESULTS

Women published fewer articles as first (1547/4267) and senior (1165/4267) authors than did men. The proportion of women in senior authorship significantly increased from 2012 to 2021 (23.4% to 30.5%, P = .0046). Across EB, a significant increase in female members (13.9% to 34.6%, P = .0006) was observed. There was a significant correlation (P < .0001) between female EB members and female authors (r = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.51-0.87) for all journals. The odds of female first authorships were 1.89 (95% CI = 1.65-2.17) times higher for articles with female senior authors than for male senior authors (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Female senior authorship significantly increased over the last decade. Journals with a higher representation of female EB members also had a higher representation of female authorship. This study found a positive association between first and senior female authorship; however, the gender gap persists. Continued efforts to reach equity in publications and EB representation are necessary.

Gender balance in infectious diseases and hospital epidemiology journals

Objective

Diversity is recognized as a driver of excellence and innovation. Women represent a significant part of the infectious diseases (ID) and hospital epidemiology (HE) workforce. We aimed to assess gender representation among editors of top ID and HE journals and explore potential correlations with the gender of first and last authors in published articles.

Methods

Using Scimago Journal & Country Rank, we identified 40 ID and 4 HE high-ranking journals. Editorial members were categorized by decision-making influence (levels I-III). We retrieved names of first and corresponding authors from 12 ID-focused journals' 2019 research articles. Gender assignment for editors, first authors, and last authors utilized digital galleries and manual searches.

Results

Among 2,797 editors from 44 journals, 33% were women. Female representation varied across editorial levels: 26% at level I, 36% at level II, and 31% at level III. Gender balance disparities existed among journals. Female first authors accounted for 50%, and female last authors accounted for 36% of the 2,725 published articles. We found weak but significant correlations between the editors' gender and the gender of the first and last authors.

Conclusion

Gender representation among ID and HE journal editors displayed unevenness, but no overt vertical segregation was observed. A generational transition among authors may be underway. Our findings suggest that a generational transition may be occurring among authors.

Gender Disparity of First Authors in Review Article Publications Related to Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a severe psychotic condition that can be diagnosed when certain symptoms, such as disorganized speech, disorganized thoughts, or negative feelings, are present for at least six months in a person's life. Gender equity and representation in academic writing are significant issues that have received more attention recently. Understanding the gender discrepancies in authorship can help researchers studying schizophrenia overcome obstacles and potential biases. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of gender discrepancy among initial authors of articles that focused on schizophrenia and to identify potential causes of such inequalities. A bibliometric analysis of articles related to schizophrenia published from 2019 to 2022 was conducted. The authors' genders were determined through available public records and professional affiliations. The analysis included assessing the proportion of male and female first authors and examining trends over time. A total of 982 articles were included in the analysis. The results revealed a significant gender disparity in first authorship, with a higher representation of male first authors (546, 55.6%) compared to female first authors (436, 44.4%). There is a significant increase in the percentage of female authors from 2019 to 2022 (i.e., from 25% to 48.5%). The number of female and male authors is predicted to remain at a constant from 2023 to 2027, with male authors at 175 and female authors at slightly above 150. The findings of this study underscore the need for continued efforts to address gender imbalances in academic publishing and promote gender equity in the field of schizophrenia research. Recognizing and rectifying these disparities can contribute to a more inclusive and diverse scientific community.

Gender representation in rheumatology journals: an assessment of editors, editorial boards, and authors

Diversity is widely recognized as a driver of excellence and innovation. In recent years, women have become an increasingly significant part of the rheumatology workforce. We aimed to assess the gender representation of the leading rheumatology journals' editors and to explore whether editors' gender correlates with the gender of the first and last authors of published articles. We conducted a cross-sectional study and extracted editorial members of rheumatology journals in quartiles 1 to 3 (Clarivate Analytics) from each journal's website. We categorized editorial positions according to the level of influence in manuscript acceptance decision-making (levels I to III). The gender of editors and of the first and last authors in all 2019 original articles published in a sample of 15 rheumatology journals was assigned using a combination of digital gallery and manual searches. There were 2242 editors' names retrieved from 43 journals, 24 (26%) of the 94 editors at level I, 139 (36%) of 385 editors at level II, and 469 (27%) of 1763 at level III were female. The imbalance between journals was heterogeneous. Females were the first authors in 1342 (48%) and the last authors in 969 (35%) of the 2797 published articles. However, we found no significant correlation between editors' and authors' gender. Our data showed uneven gender representation on the editorial boards of most rheumatology journals, but we did not find any apparent vertical segregation or influence on publishing by gender. Our findings suggest that a generational transition may be occurring among authors.

Representation of Women in Published Articles at 3 Academic Pediatric Journals: 2001 to 2022

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the representation of women authors and editorial board members at 3 pediatric journals.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of original research articles published in Pediatrics, The Journal of Pediatrics, and JAMA Pediatrics from 2001 to 2022. We analyzed five 1-year intervals and inferred the binary gender of authors by first name. Cochran-Armitage tests evaluated trends in gender proportion of authorship and editorial board membership over time. Pearson's χ2 tests compared United States (US) authorship position and faculty rank as determined by Association of American Medical Colleges' data.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2022, 4426 original research articles were studied (exclusion rate <1%). There was a 23.7%, 15.9%, and 28.8% increase in proportion of women as first authors, senior authors, and editorial board members globally, with all trends significant over time (P < .01). In 2022, US women were 67.3% of first authors, only slightly lower than the 68.6% of women junior faculty (P = .01). US women were 48.0% of US senior authors, equivalent to the 47.5% of US women senior faculty (P = .18). US women represented 47.4% of US editorial board members, equivalent to their percentage as senior faculty (P = .98).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of US and international women authorship and editorial board membership has steadily increased. The percentage of US women as junior faculty and first authors is almost equivalent. The percentage of US women as senior faculty, senior authors, and editorial board members is equivalent but significantly reduced from their junior faculty representation.

Trends in Female Authorship in Orthopaedic Literature from 2002 to 2021: An Analysis of 168,451 Authors

BACKGROUND

Significant gender disparity exists in orthopaedic surgery. While women have increasingly entered the field, we are short of the critical mass needed to drive change, including in authorship. This study aimed to characterize trends in authorship in peer-reviewed orthopaedic journals in the context of gender.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional bibliometric study of orthopaedic journals in the United States. Articles that were indexed in the orthopaedic category of the Clarivate Journal Citation Report (JCR) and the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) were analyzed (n = 82). Journals not originating from the U.S. (n = 43) or not considered primarily orthopaedic journals (n = 13) were excluded. The 2020 impact factors (IFs) of the remaining 26 journals were recorded. The articles underwent automated data collection from PubMed for January 2002 to December 2021 using R software to collect the title, the journal, the publication year, the first and senior author names, and the country of origin. Gender was determined by Gender API ( https://gender-api.com ). Names with <90% accuracy were excluded.

RESULTS

Overall, 168,451 names were studied, with 85,845 and 82,606 first and senior authors, respectively. Of the first and senior authors, 13.6% and 9.9%, respectively, were female. The proportion of female first authors was significantly greater than the proportion of female senior authors. The average IF was significantly higher for male authors compared with female authors (p < 0.005). Articles with female first authors were significantly more likely to have a female senior author. Orthopaedic subspecialty journals had a smaller proportion of manuscripts authored by female first and senior authors than general journals (p < 0.0001). There were 4,451 articles written by a single author, of which 92% (4,093) were written by a man and 8% (358) were written by a woman. Over the 20-year study period, the proportion of female first authorship exhibited a significant positive trend; however, there was a non-significant increase in female senior authorship.

CONCLUSIONS

Female representation in orthopaedics has been growing over the past decade. Increasing publication rates of female authors reveal steps toward positive gender equity in the field and present an opportunity for female leadership visibility, illustrating the capabilities of women in orthopaedics and encouraging more women to join the field.

Gender Equity in Medicine and Dermatology in the United States: The Long Road Traveled and the Journey ahead

Over the past 50 years there has been an increase in the representation of women in medicine with similar rates of men and women graduating from medical training today. Nevertheless, gender gaps in leadership, research publications, and compensation persist. Herein, we review trends in gender differences among leadership positions in academic medicine with a particular focus on dermatology, evaluate the roles of mentorship, motherhood, and gender bias on gender equity, and discuss constructive solutions for addressing gender inequities that persist in academic medicine today.

The voices of medical education scholarship: Describing the published landscape

INTRODUCTION

The voices of authors who publish medical education literature have a powerful impact on the field's discourses. Researchers have identified a lack of author diversity, which suggests potential epistemic injustice. This study investigates author characteristics to provide an evidence-based starting point for communal discussion with the intent to move medical education towards a future that holds space for, and values, diverse ways of knowing.

METHOD

The authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of all articles published in 24 medical education journals published between 2000 and 2020 to identify author characteristics, with an emphasis on author gender and geographic location and their intersection. Article metadata was downloaded from Web of Science. Genderize.io was used to predict author gender.

RESULTS

The journals published 37 263 articles authored by 62 708 unique authors. Males were more prevalent across all authorship positions (n = 62 828; 55.7%) than females (n = 49 975; 44.3%). Authors listed affiliations in 146 countries of which 95 were classified as Global South. Few articles were written by multinational teams (n = 3765; 16.2%). Global South authors accounted for 12 007 (11.4%) author positions of which 3594 (3.8%) were female.

DISCUSSION

This study provides an evidence-based starting point to discuss the imbalance of author voices in medical education, especially when considering the intersection of gender and geographical location, which further suggests epistemic injustice in medical education. If the field values a diversity of perspectives, there is considerable opportunity for improvement by engaging the community in discussions about what knowledge matters in medical education, the role of journals in promoting diversity, how to best use this baseline data and how to continue studying epistemic injustice in medical education.

The Issue of Gender Bias Represented in Authorship in the Fields of Exercise and Rehabilitation: A 5-Year Research in Indexed Journals

Despite progress made in recent decades, gender bias is still present in scientific publication authorship. The underrepresentation of women and overrepresentation of men has already been reported in the medical fields but little is known in the fields of exercise sciences and rehabilitation. This study examines trends in authorship by gender in this field in the last 5 years. All randomized controlled trials published in indexed journals from April 2017 to March 2022 through the widely inclusive Medline dataset using the MeSH term "exercise therapy" were collected, and the gender of the first and last authors was identified through names, pronouns and photographs. Year of publication, country of affiliation of the first author, and ranking of the journal were also collected. A chi-squared test for trends and logistic regression models were performed to analyze the odds of a woman being a first or last author. The analysis was performed on a total of 5259 articles. Overall, 47% had a woman as the first author and 33% had a woman as the last author, with a similar trend over five years. The trend in women's authorship varied by geographical area, with the higher representation of women authors in Oceania (first: 53.1%; last: 38.8%), North-Central America (first: 45.3%; last: 37.2%), and Europe (first: 47.2%; last: 33.3%). The logistic regression models (p < 0.001) indicated that women have lower odds of being authors in prominent authorship positions in higher-ranked journals. In conclusion, over the last five years, in the field of exercise and rehabilitation research, women and men are almost equally represented as first authors, in contrast with other medical areas. However, gender bias, unfavoring women, still exists, especially in the last authorship position, regardless of geographical area and journal ranking.

Gender Disparities Among Editorial Boards of International Urology Journals

BACKGROUND

Gender composition among surgical academic leadership, including academic medical journals, disproportionately favors men and may inadvertently introduce a bias. An understanding of the factors associated with gender representation among urologic journals may aid in prioritizing an equitable balance.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate female representation on editorial boards of pre-eminent international urologic journals.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The names and position descriptions of urologic journal leadership appointees were collected in October 2021. Gender was assessed using gender-api.com or through personal title, as available. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to describe associations between SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) quartile and geographic region with female gender representation. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 the bottom quartile concordant with journal impact factor.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 105 urology-focused journals were identified with 5989 total editorial board members, including 877 (14.6%) female, 5112 (85.4%) male, and two nonbinary persons. Female representation differed significantly by journal leadership position, SJR quartile, and geographic region. On the multivariate analysis of overall female representation, Q1 journals had higher odds of female representation than Q2 and Q3 journals, and had no significant difference from Q4 journals. Additionally, compared with Western Europe, North American journals had 78% higher odds while Asiatic journals had 50% lower odds of female representation. This study is limited by the inability to account for outside factors that lead to invitation or acceptance of journal leadership positions.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary female leadership at urology journals is about six times less common than male leadership across all journals, although trends in their proportion were noted when assessed by journal quartile and region. Addressing this gender imbalance represents an important step toward achieving gender equity in the field of urology.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we looked at the gender balance of academic journal leaders who serve as gatekeepers for sharing urologic research with the public. We found that the most prestigious journals and those in western countries tended to have the highest female representation. We hope that these findings help the academic community recognize and improve gender representation.

The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages

Background

Multiple studies have analysed gender disparities in academic research. Here we study the gender composition of the dementia research field at different stages in the career pipeline.

Methods

We use various data sources to gain insights about the gender ratio across career stages: conference attendance data as a proxy for the field as a whole; bibliometric data to know who publishes, and who occupies positions of seniority among the listed authors; and Alzheimer's Research UK's (ARUK) internal grant funding data to understand who obtains funding. We also analyse the scoring of grant applications based on the gender of the reviewers.

Results

Our results confirm that female researchers leave dementia academic research at higher rates than men, before transitioning into senior positions. In 2020, they comprised over 60% of the field, produced 54% of first authorships, but only accounted for 38% of last authorships. Overall, women received 37% of ARUK's competitive grants, with significant differences between grant schemes awarded for early career researchers (64% female awardees) compared to grant schemes aimed at senior researchers (33% female awardees). Men and women applied for and obtained grants at significantly different rates depending on the career stage at which the grant was aimed.Finally, we also observed that male and female reviewers apply evaluation criteria differently, with men giving better scores than women on average.

Conclusions

Our study adds to the evidence that shows that women get published less, receive less funding, and transition into senior academic positions at disproportionally lower rates than men do. We briefly discuss potential reasons why gender disparities arise as researchers progress into senior positions, and offer interventions ARUK can implement in its application and evaluation process to address those disparities.

La mujer en la investigación en la sociedad científica. Una aproximación mediante un análisis de producción científica en la semFYC

Objetivo: conocer el grado de feminización de la autoría de los estudios y proyectos de investigación presentados en las reuniones científicas nacionales de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria (semFYC). Métodos: se realizó un estudio descriptivo transversal mediante el análisis de las bases de datos de las comunicaciones de investigación presentadas en los congresos nacionales de la semFYC entre los años 2007 y 2021, así como de los proyectos presentados para las becas de investigación para tesis doctorales. Se recogieron las variables de género, comunidad autónoma, universidad, año de celebración del congreso y áreas temáticas estudiadas. Resultados: se analizaron 6.057 comunicaciones de investigación, siendo el 66,7% (IC 95%: 65,5-67,8) presentadas por una mujer con primera autora. Las comunidades a las que corresponden el mayor porcentaje de comunicaciones de autoría femenina fueron Cataluña (42%), Andalucía (19%), Madrid (8%), Comunidad Valenciana (5%) y Murcia (5%). Aragón es la que presenta mayor ratio de mujeres/hombres (72%), seguida de Cataluña (69%) y Andalucía (69%). Se analizaron 273 proyectos de tesis doctorales, siendo una investigadora principal en el 72% (IC 95%: 66,7-77,7), y procedente de Cataluña (23,9%), Andalucía (18,9%). Las universidades más representadas son la Autónoma de Barcelona (12,5%), Zaragoza (6,4%) y Valladolid (5,5%), estas dos últimas con la mayor ratio de feminización (100%, 48%, respectivamente). Conclusiones: la investigación presentada en los eventos de la semFYC está feminizada, siendo reflejo de la feminización de la medicina de familia, y manteniéndose a lo largo del tiempo. Las comunidades autónomas (CC. AA.) con estructuras específicas de investigación para la Atención Primaria (AP) son también las que más contribuyen a dicha feminización. Palabras clave: género, Atención Primaria, investigación, feminización de la medicina.

La mujer en la investigación en la sociedad científica. Una aproximación mediante un análisis de producción científica en la semFYC

Objetivo: conocer el grado de feminización de la autoría de los estudios y proyectos de investigación presentados en las reuniones científicas nacionales de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria (semFYC). Métodos: se realizó un estudio descriptivo transversal mediante el análisis de las bases de datos de las comunicaciones de investigación presentadas en los congresos nacionales de la semFYC entre los años 2007 y 2021, así como de los proyectos presentados para las becas de investigación para tesis doctorales. Se recogieron las variables de género, comunidad autónoma, universidad, año de celebración del congreso y áreas temáticas estudiadas. Resultados: se analizaron 6.057 comunicaciones de investigación, siendo el 66,7% (IC 95%: 65,5-67,8) presentadas por una mujer con primera autora. Las comunidades a las que corresponden el mayor porcentaje de comunicaciones de autoría femenina fueron Cataluña (42%), Andalucía (19%), Madrid (8%), Comunidad Valenciana (5%) y Murcia (5%). Aragón es la que presenta mayor ratio de mujeres/hombres (72%), seguida de Cataluña (69%) y Andalucía (69%). Se analizaron 273 proyectos de tesis doctorales, siendo una investigadora principal en el 72% (IC 95%: 66,7-77,7), y procedente de Cataluña (23,9%), Andalucía (18,9%). Las universidades más representadas son la Autónoma de Barcelona (12,5%), Zaragoza (6,4%) y Valladolid (5,5%), estas dos últimas con la mayor ratio de feminización (100%, 48%, respectivamente). Conclusiones: la investigación presentada en los eventos de la semFYC está feminizada, siendo reflejo de la feminización de la medicina de familia, y manteniéndose a lo largo del tiempo. Las comunidades autónomas (CC. AA.) con estructuras específicas de investigación para la Atención Primaria (AP) son también las que más contribuyen a dicha feminización. Palabras clave: género, Atención Primaria, investigación, feminización de la medicina.

Bibliometrics: Methods for studying academic publishing

Bibliometrics is the study of academic publishing that uses statistics to describe publishing trends and to highlight relationships between published works. Likened to epidemiology, researchers seek to answer questions about a field based on data about publications (e.g., authors, topics, funding) in the same way that an epidemiologist queries patient data to understand the health of a population. In this Eye Opener, the authors introduce bibliometrics and define its key terminology and concepts, including relational and evaluative bibliometrics. Readers are introduced to common bibliometric methods and their related strengths and weaknesses. The authors provide examples of bibliometrics applied in health professions education and propose potential future research directions. Health professions educators are consumers of bibliometric reports and can adopt its methodologies for future studies.

Joining the meta-research movement: A bibliometric case study of the journal Perspectives on Medical Education

PURPOSE

To conduct a bibliometric case study of the journal Perspectives on Medical Education (PME) to provide insights into the journal's inner workings and to "take stock" of where PME is today, where it has been, and where it might go.

METHODS

Data, including bibliographic metadata, reviewer and author details, and downloads, were collected for manuscripts submitted to and published in PME from the journal's Editorial Manager and Web of Science. Gender of authors and reviewers was predicted using Genderize.io. To visualize and analyze collaboration patterns, citation relationships and term co-occurrence social network analyses (SNA) were conducted. VOSviewer was used to visualize the social network maps.

RESULTS

Between 2012-2019 PME received, on average, 260 manuscripts annually (range = 73-402). Submissions were received from authors in 81 countries with the majority in the United States (US), United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. PME published 518 manuscripts with authors based in 31 countries, the majority being in the Netherlands, US, and Canada. PME articles were downloaded 717,613 times (mean per document: 1388). In total 1201 (55% women) unique peer reviewers were invited and 649 (57% women) completed reviews; 1227 (49% women) unique authors published in PME. SNA revealed that PME authors were quite collaborative, with most authoring articles with others and only a minority (n = 57) acting as single authors.

DISCUSSION

This case study provides a glimpse into PME and offers evidence for PME's next steps. In the future, PME is committed to growing the journal thoughtfully; diversifying and educating editorial teams, authors, and reviewers, and liberating and sharing journal data.

Achievements and Visibility of Scientific Publications of All Peruvian Medical Schools: A 5-Year Scientometric Analyses

Objective

To evaluate the bibliometric profile of the national academic production of public and private medical schools in Scopus after the publication of a new university law (2015–2020).

Methods

A descriptive bibliometric study was conducted. The secondary data corresponding to the 42 Peruvian medical schools that had scientific publications in Scopus from 2015 to 2020 were evaluated, and the Affiliation ID of each Peruvian institution was considered. Data were analysed using SciVal.

Results

The total production of the Peruvian medical schools was 5406 manuscripts (100%), of which 3018 (56%) were included in the ‘clinical medicine' category. The total production of publications in Peru from 2015 to 2020 was 21597 manuscripts, of which medical publications accounted for 7950, with only 5406 manuscripts belonging to the Faculties of Medicine of Peru. The Peruvian Journal of Experimental Medicine and Public Health had published the highest number of manuscripts (500 articles), with an approximate publication citation of two.

Conclusion

There was a constant increase in the scientific production of Peruvian medical schools from 2015 to 2020. Additionally, it was found that medical publications contribute the most to the total scientific production of Peru.

Female Surgeons for Obesity Treatment: a Snapshot Sampling in Academic Productivity : The Role of Women in Obesity Surgery

The proportion of females choosing a career in surgery is lower than that of males. Through the Obesity Surgery and SOARD journals of 2018-2020, the number of articles with female first/senior authors was identified and their characteristics were assessed. Almost 40% of the published papers were written by females, being mostly original and from University Hospitals, although the difference in the numbers between journals was prominent (p = 0.011). Articles with a female as first author had a female or male as senior, at a ratio 1:2, while less than 10% of female senior authors had a male as first. The number of females as corresponding authors in SOARD was significantly higher (p < 0.001). The findings of the present study underline the existing gender inequity in bariatric surgery.

Trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia, 2000-2020

BACKGROUND

The significance of evidence-based surgery has resulted in a shift towards producing high-quality surgical research. The aim of this bibliometric analysis was to evaluate trends in publication of general surgery research in Australia from 2000 to 2020.

METHODS

General surgery publications including clinical trials, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews and meta-analyses by Australian-affiliated authors between 2000 and 2020 were extracted from PubMed. Titles, abstracts, journals and authors were independently screened by two investigators and arbitrated by a third. Publication type and area of focus were manually entered. Quality of articles was measured by trends in impact factor (IF) and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data and identify trends.

RESULTS

Three hundered and ninety-eight articles met inclusion criteria for this study, with a progressive increase in publications over the study period. RCTs and systematic reviews accounted for 109 and 234 publications, respectively. The median number of authors remained constant (p = 0.060). There was a significant increase in publication of clinical trials and RCTs (p < 0.001) as well as systematic reviews and meta-analyses (p < 0.001). The median IF increased from 1.93 to 3.08, whilst median SJR increased from 1.11 to 1.16, equivalent to organic growth of journal IF and SJR over this period. Female authorship significantly increased over time (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is a trend towards increased quantity, quality and diversity in Australian general surgery publications, which is indicative of the progression and importance of robust modern surgical research.

Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Meta-research examining author gender, geographic location, and institutional affiliation

Introduction

Authors of knowledge syntheses make many subjective decisions during their review process. Those decisions, which are guided in part by author characteristics, can impact the conduct and conclusions of knowledge syntheses, which assimilate much of the evidence base in medical education. To better understand the evidence base, this study describes the characteristics of knowledge synthesis authors, focusing on gender, geography, and institution.

Methods

In 2020, the authors conducted meta-research to examine authors of 963 knowledge syntheses published between 1999 and 2019 in 14 core medical education journals.

Results

The authors identified 4,110 manuscript authors across all authorship positions. On average there were 4.3 authors per knowledge synthesis (SD = 2.51, Median = 4, Range = 1–22); 79 knowledge syntheses (8%) were single-author publications. Over time, the average number of authors per synthesis increased (M = 1.80 in 1999; M = 5.34 in 2019). Knowledge syntheses were authored by slightly more females (n = 2047; 50.5%) than males (n = 2005; 49.5%) across all author positions. Authors listed affiliations in 58 countries, and 58 knowledge syntheses (6%) included authors from low- or middle-income countries. Authors from the United States (n = 366; 38%), Canada (n = 233; 24%), and the United Kingdom (n = 180; 19%) published the most knowledge syntheses. Authors listed affiliation at 617 unique institutions, and first authors represented 362 unique institutions with greatest representation from University of Toronto (n = 55, 6%). Across all authorship positions, the large majority of knowledge syntheses (n = 753; 78%) included authors from institutions ranked in the top 200 globally.

Conclusion

Knowledge synthesis author teams have grown over the past 20 years, and while there is near gender parity across all author positions, authorship has been dominated by North American researchers located at highly ranked institutions. This suggests a potential overrepresentation of certain authors with particular characteristics, which may impact the conduct and conclusions of medical education knowledge syntheses.