Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

Geographic Representation of Authorship in Ophthalmic Research from Low- and Middle-Income Countries

PURPOSE

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are underrepresented in ophthalmic research, despite carrying the highest burden of visual impairment. To assess the representation of local authors in global ophthalmic research, this cross-sectional, bibliometric analysis measured the proportion of LMIC-affiliated authorship in LMIC-based ophthalmic research.

METHODS

We sampled original, primary research conducted in LMICs and published in 1 of 7 high-impact ophthalmic journals between 2017 and 2021. For each article, we extracted the number and name of country study site(s), country affiliation(s) of first and last author, proportion of LMIC-affiliated authors, funding sources, and study design.

RESULTS

Of the 1,333 studies exclusively conducted in LMICs, 89.4% of first authors and 80.6% of last authors were exclusively LMIC-affiliated. Representation of LMIC-affiliated first authors were lower in studies based in low-income countries (25.0%) or in sub-Saharan Africa (26.5%), published in journals with higher impact factors (68.0% in Ophthalmology), funded by high-income countries (HICs) (41.4%), or conducted in both LMICs and HICs (27.1%). The United States, United Kingdom, and Australia had the 3rd, 6th, and 8th largest shares of last authors. There were only 12 single-country studies conducted in low-income countries, namely Ethiopia, the Gambia, Guinea, Liberia, the Niger, and Sierra Leone. Of these countries, only three held first authorship and one held last authorship.

CONCLUSIONS

Although LMIC-based ophthalmic research has demonstrated higher local authorship representation compared to other fields, underrepresentation can be exacerbated by country income level, journal "prestige," and degree of HIC involvement. These discrepancies highlight the need for more equitable data ownership in global ophthalmic research.

Gender Trends in Authorship in 6 Major Orthopaedic Journals

BACKGROUND

Historically, orthopaedic surgery has had low female representation, with <6% of practicing surgeons identifying as female. Although prior literature has illustrated gender disparities in first and last authorship as well as changes in gender representation over time, less attention has been paid to middle authorship. We hypothesized that trends in female authorship would reflect increasing female participation in orthopaedic surgery and orthopaedic subspecialties coinciding with an overall increase in female authorship.

METHODS

Bibliometric information from articles published between 2011 and 2021 in 6 orthopaedic journals was extracted with use of the Web of Science. Collected data included author order, author names, affiliation, and corresponding author address. A gender was assigned with the use of Genderize.io, which is validated software, on the basis of author first name. Statistical analysis was performed with use of an analysis of variance for each journal, and linear regression was performed to determine trends, controlling for year.

RESULTS

Among all included orthopaedic journals, female middle authorship increased by 5 percentage points, female first authorship increased by 4 percentage points, and female last authorship increased by 1 percentage point. Over the study period, the highest rate of female middle authorship (28%) was seen in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, whereas the lowest rate (16%) was seen in The Journal of Arthroplasty . We found that the 5 highest-producing female last authors were, on average, cited significantly less per publication than their male counterparts in all but 2 journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender gaps exist within orthopaedic surgery as well as within its body of literature. Although this study highlights areas of growth, it also promotes further inquiry into research productivity and the availability of opportunity within orthopaedic surgery as a whole. The increase in female middle authorship overall and in each journal demonstrates momentum for future growth for women in the field of orthopaedic surgery.

Ethically Driven and Methodologically Tailored: Setting the Agenda for Systematic Reviews in Domestic Violence and Abuse

Purpose

Systematic reviews have an important, and growing, role to play in the global evidence eco-system of domestic violence and abuse. Alongside substantive contributions to knowledge, such reviews stimulate debates about ethical reviewing practices and the importance of tailoring methods to the nuances of the field. This paper aims to pinpoint a set of ethical and methodological priorities to guide and enhance review practices specifically in the field of domestic abuse.

Method

The five Pillars of the Research Integrity Framework (ethical guidelines for domestic abuse research) are used to interrogate the systematic review process. To do so, the Framework is retrospectively applied to a recently completed systematic review in domestic abuse. The review included a rapid systematic map and in-depth analysis of interventions aimed at creating or enhancing informal support and social networks for victim-survivors of abuse.

Results

Ethical and methodological priorities for systematic reviews in domestic abuse include (1) Safety and wellbeing: maintaining the wellbeing of researchers and stakeholders, and appraising the ethics of included studies, (2) Transparency/ accountability: transparent reporting of research funding, aims and methods together with explicit consideration of authorship of outputs, (3) Equality, human rights and social justice: developing diverse review teams/ Advisory groups, and review methods that aim to search for, and report, diverse perspectives. Considering researcher positionality/ reflexivity in the review, (4) Engagement: collaboration with non-academic stakeholders and individuals with lived experience throughout the review process, (5) Research Ethics: independent ethical scrutiny of systematic review proposals with input from researchers with expertise in systematic reviews and domestic abuse.

Conclusion

Additional research is required to comprehensively examine the ethics of each stage of the review process. In the meantime, attention should be given to the underpinning ethical framework for our systematic review practices and the wider research infrastructure that governs reviews.

Global Research on Coronaviruses: Metadata-Based Analysis for Public Health Policies

BACKGROUND

Within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper suggests a data science strategy for analyzing global research on coronaviruses. The application of reproducible research principles founded on text-as-data information, open science, the dissemination of scientific data, and easy access to scientific production may aid public health in the fight against the virus.

OBJECTIVE

The primary goal of this paper was to use global research on coronaviruses to identify critical elements that can help inform public health policy decisions. We present a data science framework to assist policy makers in implementing cutting-edge data science techniques for the purpose of developing evidence-based public health policies.

METHODS

We used the EpiBibR (epidemiology-based bibliography for R) package to gain access to coronavirus research documents worldwide (N=121,231) and their associated metadata. To analyze these data, we first employed a theoretical framework to group the findings into three categories: conceptual, intellectual, and social. Second, we mapped the results of our analysis in these three dimensions using machine learning techniques (ie, natural language processing) and social network analysis.

RESULTS

Our findings, firstly, were methodological in nature. They demonstrated the potential for the proposed data science framework to be applied to public health policies. Additionally, our findings indicated that the United States and China were the primary contributors to global coronavirus research during the study period. They also demonstrated that India and Europe were significant contributors, albeit in a secondary position. University collaborations in this domain were strong between the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, confirming the country-level findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings argue for a data-driven approach to public health policy, particularly when efficient and relevant research is required. Text mining techniques can assist policy makers in calculating evidence-based indices and informing their decision-making process regarding specific actions necessary for effective health responses.