The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented?

Female authorship trends in a high-impact Canadian medical journal: a 10-year cross-sectional series, 2013-2023

IMPORTANCE

Women are under-represented in senior roles within academic medicine, including as authors in high-impact journals.

OBJECTIVE

To examine trends and predictors of female authorship in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) as the only high-impact Canadian journal over a 10-year period to understand gender balances in Canadian academic publishing.

DESIGN

This cross-sectional study analysed trends and predictors of female authorship in articles published in CMAJ from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2023.

SETTING

Data were extracted from PubMed for CMAJ, the only high-impact Canadian medical journal (impact factor ≥10). Data extraction used the RISmed package in R Studio.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included articles published in CMAJ within the specified period. Author gender was predicted using the validated Genderize.io software. Articles where the gender of the authors could not be predicted were excluded from analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The co-primary outcomes were proportions of female first and last authors. Statistical analyses included χ2 tests comparing proportions, Jonckheere and linear regression models to evaluate trends. Among multiauthor articles, multivariable logistic regression models assessed predictors of female first and last authorship.

RESULTS

From 5805 included articles, women comprised 47% of first authors and 43% of last authors (p<0.001), both significantly lower than men (p<0.001). Female first authorship increased by 17.7% and female last authorship by 10.5% over the study period (both p<0.05 for trend), reaching a majority (58%) and near parity (48%) in 2023, respectively. Female editor-in-chief and higher proportion of female coauthors were associated with higher odds of female first and last authors; female last authors were additionally associated with higher odds of female first authors.

INTERPRETATION

Women were under-represented in authorship overall, though female first and last authorship increased over time, with first authorship exceeding parity in recent years and last authorship nearing equal representation. Female editors-in-chief and a higher proportion of female coauthors were associated with greater female first and last authorship, while female last authorship was additionally associated with higher odds of female first authorship. These findings provide insight into authorship trends in a high-impact Canadian medical journal and may inform future efforts to support gender equity in academic publishing.

Trends in orthodontic scientific contributions: An evaluation based on the American Association of Orthodontists annual sessions

Scientific contributions (lectures and posters) to the American Association of Orthodontists (AAO) annual sessions from 2013 to 2023 were investigated with the aims of analysing the contributions of each country and their efficiency, presentation trends, and gender differences during these years as well as the most frequent topics and their evolution. Official data were requested from and provided by the AAO secretary. The year and type of presentation; the name, country and gender of the first author; and the full title of the presentation were considered. In addition, six national indicators that could determine the quantity and quality of scientific production were obtained from the Our World in Data website with regard to the countries that made the greatest contributions to the AAO annual sessions. The USA featured the largest number of lecturers (69.44%), while the presentations of posters were more balanced among the 4 countries that exhibited the highest levels of production (i.e., Brazil, the USA, Mexico and South Korea). Brazil was the main country to perform above expectations. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant reduction in the number of poster presentations. The male/female ratio was close to 3:1 in terms of lectures and close to 1:1 in terms of posters. In 2023, women presented more posters than did men. The terms clear/aligners and digital were strongly present, and the terms maxillary, adults, and expansion were used increasingly frequently, while the use of the terms brackets or cephalometry decreased. American lecturers included terms that differentiated them from lecturers in other countries. The nationalities of lecturers are not closely related to those of posters, particularly with regard to the USA, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and Turkey. Research spending and economic level are the most significant factors with respect to the type and number of a country's contributions. Concerning gender, a clear imbalance in favour of men persists among lecturers. Increased distance from the USA makes it more difficult for women to serve as lecturers. An emergent paradigm shift in current topics towards a focus on the terms clear/aligners and digital in lectures is evident.

A decade of vertebrate palaeontology research: global taxa distribution, gender dynamics and evolving methodologies

Using 12 104 publications from 2014 to 2023 in the DeepBone database, this study employs bibliometric methods, including full-text latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) modelling, co-occurrence network analysis and geographic mapping with ArcGIS, to examine three key aspects of vertebrate palaeontology development: geographic distribution of newly established taxa, gender demographics among researchers and research trends. Gender data were analysed using automated tools with manual verification to ensure accuracy, while methodological evolution was investigated through systematic text mining and classification. Among 8336 newly established taxa, mammals (34.72%) and fishes (29.76%) dominate, followed by reptiles (25.34%), birds (7.39%) and amphibians (2.80%). Geographic analysis reveals significant regional disparities, with the USA (13.50%) and China (13.32%) contributing the most, while Africa and Oceania remain under-represented (less than 10%). Gender analysis indicates a gradual increase in female representation from 22.78 to 27.20% over the decade, highlighting the imperative to address gender disparities in vertebrate palaeontology, thereby advancing equity in alignment with UNESCO Sustainable Development Goal 5. LDA topic modelling identifies 15 distinct research topics, encompassing evolutionary biology, cranial and skeletal morphology, dinosaur-bird evolution and human evolution, while co-occurrence analysis highlights the evolution of research methodologies, revealing strong interconnections between phylogenetic analysis (15%), traditional morphological analysis (12%) and high-resolution imaging techniques (9%).

Shifting landscapes of gender equity in oncology journals: a decade of authorship trends

BACKGROUND

Gender disparities persist in academic oncology, particularly in authorship and senior academic roles. This study evaluates trends in authorship gender representation over the past decade across top oncology journals, focusing on regional, journal-specific, and citation-based disparities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted on 29,005 articles published between 2014 and 2023 in the top 20 oncology journals, identified through the Web of Science database. Author gender was determined using the NamSor tool. Temporal trends were analyzed using linear regression, and multivariate logistic regression identified factors contributing to gender disparities. Regional and citation analyses explored geographic variations and citation count differences.

RESULTS

Among analyzed articles, 41.81% of first authors and 29.93% of last authors were female. Female first authorship showed a significant upward trend (P < 0.01), with gender parity projected by 2034, while parity for last authors is expected by 2055. Regional differences were notable, with North America and Europe leading in female representation. Certain journals, such as CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians and Molecular Cancer, exhibited higher female authorship proportions, while Journal of Clinical Oncology had the lowest. Citation analysis revealed female-authored articles received significantly fewer citations than male-authored ones (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although female authorship in oncology journals has increased over the past decade, disparities remain, particularly in senior roles and citation impact. Addressing these issues requires targeted strategies, including mentorship programs, greater female representation in editorial boards, and institutional policies promoting gender equity.

Representation of women in scientific subjects: overview of systematic reviews investigating career progress in academic publishing with a focus on mental health

BACKGROUND

Women's authorship position in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine research reflects career progression, especially the transition from first to last (usually senior) author. Employment of women in mental health sciences has increased, and so should have had an impact on the change to senior author position.

AIMS

To identify if first or last women's authorship has changed, and mental health has better representation.

METHOD

We investigated women's authorship position in a systematic review and meta-analyses, following PRISMA guidelines and using random-effects regression analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 149 studies with sampling periods from 1975 to 2020 (excluding potential COVID-19 pandemic effects) that showed a large variation of women authors, and found an average proportion for first (26.2%) and last (16.1%) author position. In mental health (psychology and psychiatry), there was a higher representation, with 40% first author and 36.7% last author position, whereas medicine was 25.9% and 19.5%, respectively. The rate of change for psychology and psychiatry women authors was also higher every 10 years: 8.56% (95% CI 6.44-10.69%) for first and 6.86% (95% CI 4.57-9.15%) for last author, and rate was 2.35% higher for first author and 2.65% higher for last author than in medicine. Different methods of classifying gender and identification method did not affect our results.

CONCLUSIONS

Although mental health topics seem to fare better, our comprehensive review highlighted that the proportions of women first compared with last authors shows the same leaky pipeline as in other analyses, so we cannot be complacent about gender equality and career progression.

Do Manuscripts by Female Evolutionary Biologists Spend Longer Under Review?

Women are under-represented in academia and in STEM careers, especially at senior positions and top institutions. This may be, at least in part, due to the many obstacles that they experience along the academic pipeline. There has been substantial debate as to whether women are treated unfairly during the peer review process. An analysis of over 9,000 research articles published in top Economics journals has recently shown that female-authored articles tend to spend 3 to 6 months longer under review (period from submission to acceptance), and to have more readable abstracts, than male-authored articles, suggesting that female-authored articles are held to higher standards. We set out to determine whether these trends were also present among 49,031 papers published in 11 Evolutionary Biology journals. We found that female representation among article authors substantially increased over the decades. The percentage of women is lower among corresponding authors than among all authors, especially of recent articles. In addition, female first authors were less likely to be corresponding authors than male first authors, and the gender of the first author correlated with the gender of the corresponding author. In some of the journals, female-authored articles spent significantly longer under review; however, most of the observed differences vanish after controlling for the date of publication and the number of authors. In addition, female-authored abstracts are not more readable. Our results suggest that the peer review process in the field of Evolutionary Biology is generally not biased against women.

The Bibliometric Evolution of Neurosurgery Publications From 1977 to 2023

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neurosurgery is a world leader in disseminating neurosurgical science. Although the literature has seen significant increases in academic collaboration, data science, and authorship diversity, the bibliometric evolution of Neurosurgery remains unknown. This study sought to elucidate bibliometric trends in Neurosurgery from 1977 to 2023.

METHODS

Wolters Kluwer and Web of Science were used to identify all publications in Neurosurgery from 1977 to 2023. Database utilization was analyzed from 2007 to 2023 using abstract keywords. The BERTopic tool analyzed prevailing subspecialty themes. Publication types including clinical/case report/review were analyzed. Statistical analysis included exponential and linear regression.

RESULTS

From 1977 to 2023, 29 755 publications containing 127 171 authors were published in Neurosurgery. From 1977 to 2023, the mean authorship count per publication exponentially increased (2.4 to 8.4, 2.0% annually) (R 2 = 0.76), small authorship groups (≤ 5 authors) linearly decreased (90% to 37%) (R = 0.93), multinational authorship groups linearly increased (0% to 21.2%) (R = 0.95), and authorship affiliations per publication exponentially increased (1.3 to 4.6, 3.2% annually) (R 2 = 0.65). From 1990 to 2023, female first authorship linearly increased (7.5% to 15.7%) (R = 0.93), Bachelor degree first authorship increased (0.6% to 12.5%), and MD/PhD senior authorship increased (6.2% to 24.7%), with more review articles and less case reports. Cerebrovascular topics dominated from 1980 to 2020, with spine topics most represented in the 2020s. Database utilization demonstrated an exponential, 4.6-fold increase from 2007 (0.38%) to 2023 (2.14%) (R = 0.63).

CONCLUSION

Neurosurgery publications have demonstrated increasing authorship counts, authorship diversity, collaboration, and database utilization since the journal's 1977 inception, prominently publishing on topics in cerebrovascular and spine research.

Integrating "nature" in the water-energy-food Nexus: Current perspectives and future directions

Integrated approaches for managing natural resources are said to meet increasing demand for water, energy, and food, while maintaining the integrity of ecosystems, and ensuring equitable access to resources. The Water-Energy-Food (WEF) Nexus has been proposed as a cross-sectoral approach to manage trade-offs and exploit synergies that arise among these sectors. Although not initially included as a component of the Nexus, the role of nature in sustaining the water, energy, and food sectors and in regulating their interrelationships is increasingly recognised by Nexus researchers and practitioners. To converge existing approaches that integrate nature into the WEF Nexus and suggest a common framework, we - an interdisciplinary group of natural resources management researchers and systems thinkers from the European research network NEXUSNET COST Action - followed a collaborative process of knowledge creation combining literature review, elicitation of expert opinion and collaborative writing. Our results reveal a multiplicity of concepts utilised in the literature to represent, partially or fully, "nature" in the Nexus, such as "environment", "ecosystems", "ecosystem services", "social-ecological systems", and "biodiversity". Disparity was also found in the role attributed to nature, represented by three key paradigms: (1) ecosystems as the fourth component of an expanded Nexus, i.e., the WEF-Ecosystems (WEFE) Nexus; (2) ecosystems as a foundational layer to the Nexus; and (3) the WEF Nexus as a central component of social-ecological systems (SES). By creating a hybrid approach that brings together the benefits of the respective paradigms, we present a forward-looking WEFE Nexus conceptualisation. This paradigm expands the mutual interlinkages among water, energy and food to the entirety of SES, thus acknowledging the social-ecological processes that are affected by and affect the WEF Nexus. The results of this collaborative research effort intend to provide researchers and stakeholders with means to better understand and ultimately manage Nexus issues towards a transformative change.

Editors-in-chief in social sciences: Mapping the institutional, geographical, and gender representation between academic fields

This study systematically maps the network structure of the editors-in-chief in social sciences journals, focusing on their gender representation, geographical distribution, and institutional composition. Drawing upon large-scale data from 3,320 JCR-ranked journals of 57 different fields in the social sciences (4,868 editors-in-chief from 1,485 affiliations of 71 countries), the study aims to illustrate the current connections of editorial leadership in social sciences. Findings reveal that two countries-the U.S. and the U.K.-and their institutions shape almost all fields of the social sciences, with institutions from other geographies, particularly non-English-speaking countries, being substantially underrepresented. However, there is no central institution that dominates across all fields, but within dominant geographies, a reduced number of different affiliations prevail in the most important intellectual terrains. In terms of gender representation, there is a significant imbalance across all dimensions under study. Male editors-in-chief outnumber females across most fields (66.67%), countries (76.60%), and affiliations (63.16%). All in all, by critically mapping the connections of editors-in-chief in social sciences journals, this study seeks to advance our understanding of the current structure of editorial governance and, in turn, stimulate initiatives aimed at fostering a more representative leadership in social science, keeping levels of scientific excellence constant.

Academic Promotions in Medicine: Characterizing Differences in Curriculum Vitae Across Race and Sex

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate quantitative and qualitative differences by sex and race/ethnic identities in curriculum vitae (CV) of faculty candidates for promotion.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multisite, single-institution study of all candidates who applied to be considered for promotion to associate professor or professor from January 2015 to July 2019. Data on leadership positions, grants, and publications were abstracted from CV using a standardized procedure. Demographic data, including sex, race, and part-time status were obtained from the Human Resources database. Characteristics from CV were compared between groups using χ2 or Fisher exact tests for categorical data, and Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous data.

RESULTS

A total of 162 women and 300 men applied for associate professorship and 89 women and 231 men applied for professorship. There were 304 White, 112 Asian, and 43 underrepresented in medicine (URM) candidates for associate professorship and 228 White, 68 Asian, and 22 URM candidates for professorship. Women were more likely to work part-time than men (associate professor: 23.5% vs 3.3%, respectively, P<.001; professor: 24.7% vs 5.6%, respectively, P<.001) and had fewer papers published overall (associate professor: median 35 vs 40, respectively, P=.001; professor: median 66 vs 77, respectively, P=.012). White candidates were more likely to have held an elected office to society (13.5% vs 3.6% Asian vs 0% URM, P=.001). Asian candidates were less likely to be a chair/co-chair compared with White individuals and other URMs (3.6% vs 10.9% vs 14.0%, respectively, P=.043). The ratios of candidates for professor-to-associate professor for women and URM was 50% compared with 25% for White men, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The participants' CV demonstrated notable differences associated with the candidate's race/ethnicity and sex.

Disparities of women's authorship in Colombia: A cross-sectional analysis

Accepted manuscripts published in medical journals play a crucial role within the scientific community. Over the past few decades, there has been a gradual increase in the number of women entering the medical field. However, women remain underrepresented as first and last authors in medical journals. This lack of representation makes it harder for them to reach leadership roles and advance academically. Even if this has been studied in high-income countries, low- and middle-income countries still lack evidence to prove this fundamental problem. This study aims to do this by investigating the gender distribution among authors and exploring disparities in authorship in Colombia. The analysis encompassed 6,088 articles derived from 54 research journals obtained from the official website of Colombia's Ministry of Health. The journals included enhance the significance of this paper, as they are typically not included in indexed databases. Consequently, their inclusion in gender evaluations has been limited in previous studies. These were predominantly original research articles, although case reports and reviews were also present. Until now, there has been no assessment of gender disparities in authorship within medical and surgical specialty journals in Colombia. The presence of enduring gender differences in medical authorship in Colombia remains evident, independent of the temporal, geographical, or academic domain. Even when factors such as medical specialization and geographic location influenced women's authorship proportions, the gap persisted in all cases. This highlights the critical need for increased support for women researchers and equitable resource allocation to address the specific medical specializations as well as geographical locations that we found were even more affected by these gender disparities. This paper highlights the urgent need to address gender disparities in the authorship of medical and surgical research publications in Colombia and other Latin American countries. Addressing these disparities is a critical step toward assisting women in advancing in an equal and fair medical profession.

Gender inventorship equity in patent prosecution

There are pervasive gender gaps throughout the patent process. Here, we add to the literature by providing an in-depth analysis of gendered outcomes across each stage of patent prosecution. We show that female inventors are more likely to face rejection, experience unsuccessful appeals, and exhibit lower responsiveness to rejections than male counterparts. Not only are women less likely to patent their invention, but each stage of examination individually contributes to a lower aggregate grant rate for female inventors. Our research finds that, unlike small and large entity industry equivalents, university-filed patent applications demonstrate increased gender parity in allowance rates and continued prosecution after rejection. Moreover, small entities-patent applicants with typically smaller budgets-are either more than or equally likely to exhibit gender parity when compared to larger firms. We anticipate this study to be a starting point for a more sophisticated discussion around closing gender gaps in patenting and STEM.

A national survey of career development according to gender and subspecialties among cardiologists in Japan

BACKGROUND

Training opportunities, work satisfaction, and the factors that influence them according to gender and subspecialties are understudied among Japanese cardiologists.

METHODS

We investigated the career development of Japanese cardiologists with an e-mail questionnaire. Feelings of inequality in training opportunities, work dissatisfaction, and reasons were assessed by examining the cardiologists' gender and invasiveness of subspecialties.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 2,566 cardiologists. Female cardiologists were underrepresented in invasive subspecialties compared to males (14.2% vs. 85.8%, p<0.0001). In both invasive and non-invasive subspecialties, female cardiologists felt more inequality in training opportunities than males (invasive: 50.0% vs. 36.2%, non-invasive: 41.6% vs. 30.9%, p<0.001, respectively) and were less satisfied with their work (invasive: 26.0% vs. 18.3%, non-invasive: 24.7% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.001, respectively). Although female cardiologists in invasive subspecialties did not feel significantly more inequal and dissatisfied than those in non-invasive subspecialties (p = 0.063 and p = 0.758, respectively), male cardiologists in invasive subspecialties felt more inequal and dissatisfied than those in non-invasive subspecialties (p = 0.015 and p = 0.040, respectively). Female cardiologists were more influenced by gender bias and family issues for inequality in training opportunities (p = 0.0001, respectively), whereas male cardiologists were likely to be affected by specifications of belonging hospitals. Both genders felt dissatisfied when their expectations were unmet and they were overworked.

CONCLUSIONS

Female cardiologists felt more inequality regarding training opportunities and dissatisfaction with career development than male cardiologists in both the invasive and non-invasive subspecialties. Diversity support is warranted for achieving satisfying career course regardless of gender and subspecialty.

Underrepresented minority faculty in the USA face a double standard in promotion and tenure decisions

Underrepresented minority (URM) faculty face challenges in many domains of academia, from university admissions to grant applications. We examine whether this translates to promotion and tenure (P&T) decisions. Data from five US universities on 1,571 faculty members' P&T decisions show that URM faculty received 7% more negative votes and were 44% less likely to receive unanimous votes from P&T committees. A double standard in how scholarly productivity is rewarded is also observed, with below-average h-indexes being judged more harshly for URM faculty than for non-URM faculty. This relationship is amplified for faculty with intersectional backgrounds, especially URM women. The differential treatment of URM women was mitigated when external reviewers highlighted candidates' scholarship more in their review letters. In sum, the results support the double standard hypothesis and provide evidence that different outcomes in P&T decision-making processes contribute to the sustained underrepresentation of URM faculty in tenured faculty positions.

Comparative analysis of automatic gender detection from names: evaluating the stability and performance of ChatGPT versus Namsor, and Gender-API

The gender classification from names is crucial for uncovering a myriad of gender-related research questions. Traditionally, this has been automatically computed by gender detection tools (GDTs), which now face new industry players in the form of conversational bots like ChatGPT. This paper statistically tests the stability and performance of ChatGPT 3.5 Turbo and ChatGPT 4o for gender detection. It also compares two of the most used GDTs (Namsor and Gender-API) with ChatGPT using a dataset of 5,779 records compiled from previous studies for the most challenging variant, which is the gender inference from full name without providing any additional information. Results statistically show that ChatGPT is very stable presenting low standard deviation and tight confidence intervals for the same input, while it presents small differences in performance when prompt changes. ChatGPT slightly outperforms the other tools with an overall accuracy over 96%, although the difference is around 3% with both GDTs. When the probability returned by GDTs is factored in, differences get narrower and comparable in terms of inter-coder reliability and error coded. ChatGPT stands out in the reduced number of non-classifications (0% in most tests), which in combination with the other metrics analyzed, results in a solid alternative for gender inference. This paper contributes to current literature on gender detection classification from names by testing the stability and performance of the most used state-of-the-art AI tool, suggesting that the generative language model of ChatGPT provides a robust alternative to traditional gender application programming interfaces (APIs), yet GDTs (especially Namsor) should be considered for research-oriented purposes.

Inferring gender from first names: Comparing the accuracy of Genderize, Gender API, and the gender R package on authors of diverse nationality

Meta-researchers commonly leverage tools that infer gender from first names, especially when studying gender disparities. However, tools vary in their accuracy, ease of use, and cost. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy and cost of the commercial software Genderize and Gender API, and the open-source gender R package. Differences in binary gender prediction accuracy between the three services were evaluated. Gender prediction accuracy was tested on a multi-national dataset of 32,968 gender-labeled clinical trial authors. Additionally, two datasets from previous studies with 5779 and 6131 names, respectively, were re-evaluated with modern implementations of Genderize and Gender API. The gender inference accuracy of Genderize and Gender API were compared, both with and without supplying trialists' country of origin in the API call. The accuracy of the gender R package was only evaluated without supplying countries of origin. The accuracy of Genderize, Gender API, and the gender R package were defined as the percentage of correct gender predictions. Accuracy differences between methods were evaluated using McNemar's test. Genderize and Gender API demonstrated 96.6% and 96.1% accuracy, respectively, when countries of origin were not supplied in the API calls. Genderize and Gender API achieved the highest accuracy when predicting the gender of German authors with accuracies greater than 98%. Genderize and Gender API were least accurate with South Korean, Chinese, Singaporean, and Taiwanese authors, demonstrating below 82% accuracy. Genderize can provide similar accuracy to Gender API while being 4.85x less expensive. The gender R package achieved below 86% accuracy on the full dataset. In the replication studies, Genderize and gender API demonstrated better performance than in the original publications. Our results indicate that Genderize and Gender API achieve similar accuracy on a multinational dataset. The gender R package is uniformly less accurate than Genderize and Gender API.

A persistent gender pay gap among faculty in a public university system

Despite movements towards gender parity within academia, women faculty continue to be paid less than men. While previous research has explained the gap using academic rank/seniority and productivity, existing findings are limited by either their examination of base pay or reliance on self-reported data. Here we extend the analysis beyond base pay, link faculty salary records of one public university system in the U.S. to the OpenAlex bibliometric database, and separately analyze the gender pay gap in the base (grade) and other pay (off-grade). Using stepwise regression models, we find that faculty rank accounts for a significant gap in the base pay while performance-based variables such as H-index or specialization do not play a crucial role. For other pay, no variables stand out in explaining the substantial pay gap between women and men faculty. Our results suggest that a primary source of the remaining gender pay gap is the off-grade pay. Different policy approaches are required to reduce the gender pay gap depending on the specific type of salary being targeted.

Over twenty years of publications in Ecology: Over-contribution of women reveals a new dimension of gender bias

Biographical features like social and economic status, ethnicity, sexuality, care roles, and gender unfairly disadvantage individuals within academia. Authorship patterns should reflect the social dimension behind the publishing process and co-authorship dynamics. To detect potential gender biases in the authorship of papers and examine the extent of women's contribution in terms of the substantial volume of scientific production in Ecology, we surveyed papers from the top-ranked journal Ecology from 1999 to 2021. We developed a Women's Contribution Index (WCI) to measure gender-based individual contributions. Considering gender, allocation in the author list, and the total number of authors, the WCI calculates the sum of each woman's contribution per paper. We compared the WCI with women's expected contributions in a non-gender-biased scenario. Overall, women account for 30% of authors of Ecology, yet their contribution to papers is higher than expected by chance (i.e., over-contribution). Additionally, by comparing the WCI with an equivalent Men's Contribution Index, we found that women consistently have higher contributions compared to men. We also observed a temporal trend of increasing women's authorship and mixed-gender papers. This suggests some progress in addressing gender bias in the field of ecology. However, we emphasize the need for a better understanding of the pattern of over-contribution, which may partially stem from the phenomenon of over-compensation. In this context, women might need to outperform men to be perceived and evaluated as equals. The WCI provides a valuable tool for quantifying individual contributions and understanding gender biases in academic publishing. Moreover, the index could be customized to suit the specific question of interest. It serves to uncover a previously non-quantified type of bias (over-contribution) that, we argue, is the response to the inequitable structure of the scientific system, leading to differences in the roles of individuals within a scientific publishing team.

Gender differences in research fields of bioeconomy and rural development-based on sustainable systems in Latin America and Africa regions

Using bibliometric analysis of large-scale publication data is a simple approach to exploring gender-related trends, especially gender equality in academic publishing. The aim of this study is to investigate gender trends in the fields of bio-economy and rural development sciences in two under develop regions as Latin America and Africa. This study examines gender differences in these fields in order to: (1) recognize the contribution of female researchers in bioeconomy and rural development, (2) explore the relational structure of gender aspects in academic publications, (3) identify trends in female authorship in these scientific research fields over time, and finally (4) identify gender potentials for women to become more visible in these fields of study. To achieve these objectives, we used bibliometric tools to analyses 1891 publication records in bioeconomy and rural development. After cleaning the database of full names of authors of academic publications relevant to the field studies, we performed a series of statistical analyses in R and SPSS software, such as Lotkas distribution, network analysis, co-authorship analysis and spatial distribution of authors in the study. The results show that the number of male authors is almost three times higher than the number of female authors, suggesting that women are under-represented in the fields studied. Men occupy the most important position of authorship in scientific articles; publications with corresponding male authors were found in 1389 out of 1891 publications related to the bio-economy and rural development. In terms of geographical regions, publications with female authors were more prevalent in European and North American areas, with a small exception in some developing countries such as Argentina and South Africa. In terms of research networks, from the total number of authors evaluated, only 23% are female authors on the map of research influence. This indicates that there is a significant gap to be filled in the promotion of scholarly impact through the sharing of knowledge and expertise among authors.

Twenty-Five Years of Progress-Lessons Learned From JMIR Publications to Address Gender Parity in Digital Health Authorships: Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Digital health research plays a vital role in advancing equitable health care. The diversity of research teams is thereby instrumental in capturing societal challenges, increasing productivity, and reducing bias in algorithms. Despite its importance, the gender distribution within digital health authorship remains largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the gender distribution among first and last authors in digital health research, thereby identifying predicting factors of female authorship.

METHODS

This bibliometric analysis examined the gender distribution across 59,980 publications from 1999 to 2023, spanning 42 digital health journals indexed in the Web of Science. To identify strategies ensuring equality in research, a detailed comparison of gender representation in JMIR journals was conducted within the field, as well as against a matched sample. Two-tailed Welch 2-sample t tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and chi-square tests were used to assess differences. In addition, odds ratios were calculated to identify predictors of female authorship.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that 37% of first authors and 30% of last authors in digital health were female. JMIR journals demonstrated a higher representation, with 49% of first authors and 38% of last authors being female, yielding odds ratios of 1.96 (95% CI 1.90-2.03; P<.001) and 1.78 (95% CI 1.71-1.84; P<.001), respectively. Since 2008, JMIR journals have consistently featured a greater proportion of female first authors than male counterparts. Other factors that predicted female authorship included having female authors in other relevant positions and gender discordance, given the higher rate of male last authors in the field.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an evident shift toward gender parity across publications in digital health, particularly from the publisher JMIR Publications. The specialized focus of its sister journals, equitable editorial policies, and transparency in the review process might contribute to these achievements. Further research is imperative to establish causality, enabling the replication of these successful strategies across other scientific fields to bridge the gender gap in digital health effectively.

Gender disparities in social and personality psychology awards from 1968 to 2021

Gender disparities persist in academic psychology. The present study extended previous investigations to social and personality psychology award recipients. We collated publicly available data on award winners (N = 2700) from 17 international societies from 1968 to 2021. Features of the award, including year given, type of award, seniority level, whether the award was shared with more than one winner, and gender/sex of the recipient were coded. Overall, men were more likely to be recognized with awards than women, but the proportion of awards won by women has increased over time. Despite this increased share of awards, women were more likely to win awards for service and teaching (which are generally viewed as less prestigious) rather than research contributions. These differences were moderated by year - women were more likely to win service or teaching awards, compared to research awards, after 1999 and 2007, respectively. Women were more likely to win awards at postgraduate/early career levels or open to all levels compared to senior awards. Findings suggest that women's greater representation in academic psychology in recent years has not been accompanied by parity in professional recognition and eminence.

Diversity under the microscope: Lessons for building belonging in interdisciplinary spaces from the Women in Imaging + Industry bootcamp

As scientific projects and labs benefit from increasingly interdisciplinary expertise, students and trainees find themselves navigating a myriad of academic spaces, each with its own workplace culture and demographics. A clear example is the interdisciplinary field of optics and biological microscopy which bridges biology, physics and engineering. While Biology PhDs are now >50% women, men in physics and engineering fields still significantly outnumber women, resulting in an imbalance of gender representation among microscopists and other 'tool innovators' in the interdisciplinary field of biological microscopy and biomedical optics. In addition to the cultural and cognitive whiplash that results from disparate representation between fields such as Biology, Engineering, and Physics, indifference from institutional leaders to implement equity-focused initiatives further contributes to cultures of exclusion, rather than belonging, for women. Here we elaborate on the motivation, structure, and outcomes of building a specific affinity-based bootcamp as an intervention to create an inclusive, welcoming learning environment for women in optics. Considering the presence of nonbinary, trans and other gender minoritised scientists, we recognise that women are not the only gender group underrepresented in biological microscopy and biomedical optics; still, we focus our attention on women in this specific intervention to improve gender parity in biological microscopy and biomedical optics. We hope that these strategies exemplify concrete paths forward for increasing belonging in interdisciplinary fields, a key step towards improving and diversifying graduate education.

Scientific production in sexual and reproductive health and rights research according to gender and affiliation: An analysis of publications from 1972 to 2021

INTRODUCTION

Peer-reviewed literature is commonly used to assess academic progress and research excellency. However, representation in authorship of global health publications is biased and unfair. In order to shed light on current gaps towards attaining gender equality in scientific production and shift power asymmetries in global health research, we conducted an assessment of authorship trends from 1972 to 2021 with a focus on gender and geographic representation in scientific articles authored or co-authored by researchers affiliated with UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and HRP public reports for publications where at least one author was affiliated with HRP. Our main outcome measures were author gender and location of author affiliation, classified by region and country income group. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the publications under analysis as well as the total number of authors from the included papers. We applied a logistic regression model to explore associations between author gender and other characteristics of published articles and a time series analysis to assess how time can influence the inclusion of women as authors in a publication. Python and R were used for all analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 1,484 publications with 14,424 listed authors representing 5,950 unique authors were included in our analysis: 42.5% were female, 35.1% male, and 22.4% unknown (p<0.0001). First authorship was more likely female (56.9%) and from a high-income country (74.6%, p<0.0001) while last authorship was mostly male (53.7%) also from a high-income country (82.5%, p<0.0001). Females more frequently published papers using qualitative data (61.4%) and reviews/estimates (59.4%) while men published more case control (70.7%) and randomised controlled studies (53.0%), p<0.0001. The adjusted odds of there being a female author increased 4% for every additional year that passed.

CONCLUSION

While there are more females authoring articles as compared to the past, they are still lagging behind with regards to seniority and prestige. Likewise, female representation is closely tied to what institution they are affiliated with and where that institution is located. Global health research institutions need to actively promote change by ensuring women are included in research and research outputs, giving them opportunities to lead.

Trends in research approaches and gender in plant ecology dissertations over four decades

Dissertations are a foundational scientific product; they are the formative product that early-career scientists create and share original knowledge. The methodological approaches used in dissertations vary with the research field. In plant ecology, these approaches include observations, experiments (field or controlled environment), literature reviews, theoretical approaches, or analyses of existing data (including "big data"). Recently, concerns have been raised about the rise of "big data" studies and the loss of observational and field-based studies in ecology, but such trends have not been formally quantified. Therefore, we examined how the emphasis on each of these categories has changed over time and whether male and female authors differ in the methods employed. We found remarkable temporal consistency, with observational studies being dominant over the entire time span examined. There was an increase in the number of approaches employed per dissertation, with increases in analyses of databases and theoretical studies adding to rather than replacing traditional methodologies (like observations and field experiments). The representation of women increased over time. There were some differences in the approaches taken by men and women, which requires further investigation.

Towards equal representation - A bibliometric analysis of authorships in Laboratory Medicine and Clinical Chemistry from the United States, Canada, and Europe (2005-2022)

Objectives

Although diversity has been demonstrated to benefit research groups, women remain underrepresented in most scientific disciplines, including Laboratory Medicine and Clinical Chemistry. In order to promote diversity and equality in scientific communities, understanding the gender distribution of authorship is crucial.

Methods

This study included a total of 30,268 Web of Science-listed Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine publications from the United States of America, Canada, and the member countries of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine from 2005 to 2022. In addition to the publication productivity of female and male authors over time, gender-specific publication characteristics and country-specific gender distributions of authorships were examined.

Results

Overall, publications with female first authors increased by 49 % between 2005 and 2022, averaging 42 % female first authors. Eastern Europe (60 %) and Southern Europe (51 %) had particularly high proportions of female first authors. While female last authorship was the most predictive of female first authorship, with an odds ratio of 2.01 (95 % CI: 1.91-2.12, p < 0.001), only 27 % of last authors were female. Moreover, citation rate was not predictive of female first or last authorship.

Conclusion

Authorship in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine is moving towards gender parity. This trend is more pronounced for first authors than for last authors. Further research into the citations of female authors in this discipline could be a starting point for increasing the visibility of women researchers in science. Moreover, geographical differences may provide opportunities for future research on gender parity across disciplines.

Analysis of science journalism reveals gender and regional disparities in coverage

Science journalism is a critical way for the public to learn about and benefit from scientific findings. Such journalism shapes the public's view of the current state of science and legitimizes experts. Journalists can only cite and quote a limited number of sources, who they may discover in their research, including recommendations by other scientists. Biases in either process may influence who is identified and ultimately included as a source. To examine potential biases in science journalism, we analyzed 22,001 non-research articles published by Nature and compared these with Nature-published research articles with respect to predicted gender and name origin. We extracted cited authors' names and those of quoted speakers. While citations and quotations within a piece do not reflect the entire information-gathering process, they can provide insight into the demographics of visible sources. We then predicted gender and name origin of the cited authors and speakers. We compared articles with a comparator set made up of first and last authors within primary research articles in Nature and a subset of Springer Nature articles in the same time period. In our analysis, we found a skew toward quoting men in Nature science journalism. However, quotation is trending toward equal representation at a faster rate than authorship rates in academic publishing. Gender disparity in Nature quotes was dependent on the article type. We found a significant over-representation of names with predicted Celtic/English origin and under-representation of names with a predicted East Asian origin in both in extracted quotes and journal citations but dampened in citations.

An Overview of Physical Activity Research Evolution in Africa: The Global Observatory for Physical Activity-GoPA!

OBJECTIVE

To describe the evolution of physical activity (PA) research in Africa, examine income and gender inequalities, and discuss future possibilities.

METHODS

A secondary analyses of the Global Observatory for Physical Activity data on PA research in Africa (1950-2019).

RESULTS

We identified 514 PA articles from 47 African countries in the past 70 years. Majority (83.1%) of the articles were published between 2012 and 2019. Fifteen countries had no publications. Six countries (South Africa [n = 156], Nigeria [n = 85], Ethiopia [n = 44], Ghana [n = 41], Kenya [n = 39], and Cameroon [n = 20]) accounted for about 75% of the publications. Most articles were observational (92.4%), single-country studies (78.4%), with male first (58.4%) and last authors (68%), and were classified as surveillance studies (45.1%). Few studies addressed interventions (5.8%) and policy (3.5%) or used device-based PA measurement (14.0%). The number of articles per country was positively related to human population level (r = .552, P = .000) and gross domestic product % spent on research and development (r = .301, P = .040). The publication rate per 100,000 people was positively related with the human development index (r = .349, P = .016) and negatively with the gender inequality index (r = -.360, P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide an overview and status of PA research in Africa, highlighting country differences and gender inequalities in authorship. The findings may be used to benchmark the evolution of research in the region and to inform areas for improvement. There is an urgent need for more PA interventions and policy studies in Africa.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Gender distribution in publishing in five leading optometry journals

PURPOSE

To explore gender distribution in authorship and citation parameters of articles published in five optometry journals included in the Ophthalmology category of Journal Citation Reports.

METHODS

The Scopus database was used to retrieve all citable articles published in 2011 and 2021 in Optometry and Vision Science, Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, Clinical Experimental Optometry, Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, and Eye and Contact Lens. Gender of the first, last and single authors of all articles, and citation parameters of articles published in 2011 up to May 2023 were determined. Gender of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board of these journals was investigated (May 2023).

RESULTS

Only one journal had a female editor-in-chief and three journals had more males than females in their editorial board. In 2011 and 2021, respectively, 40.1% and 48.0% of articles had female as the first authors (χ 1 , 948 2  = 5.77; p = 0.02), and 32.7% and 39.6% had female as the last authors (χ 1 , 948 2  = 4.61; p = 0.03). Gender parity was observed in one journal for the first author and none for the last author in 2011, and in three journals for the first author and one for the last author in 2021. Regarding combinations of male (M) and female (F) first and last authorship positions, the authors of articles in 2011 were MM (44.5%), FM (22.8%), FF (17.3%) and MF (15.4%), and MM (34.6%), FM (25.8%), FF (22.1%) and MF (17.5%) in 2021. Differences between 2011 and 2021 were statistically significant (χ 3 , 948 2  = 9.80; p = 0.02). The proportion of authorship combinations did not show statistically significant differences among journals in 2011 or in 2021. Neither citation nor self-citation were influenced by gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender disparities persist in optometry journals, with females being under-represented in senior and leadership positions. Increasing the awareness of gender disparity in authorship is a necessary step towards ensuring fairness in science in general, and optometry in particular.

Heteroptera research in Latin America and the Caribbean (Insecta, Hemiptera): status and perspectives in the 21st century

Latin American and the Caribbean regions (LAC) harbor one of the most biodiverse areas of the world, the Neotropics. True bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) are a diverse lineage of insects, with more than 45,000 species, particularly speciose in the Neotropical region. True bugs are fundamental in the dynamics of natural and modified ecosystems, with several species critical to agriculture and public health. We compiled Heteroptera research in LAC from 1998-2022 using bibliographic databases. Productivity, collaborative networks, and the main topics studied were analyzed. A total of 1,651 Heteroptera studies from LAC were found, with continuous growth being 2021 the most prolific. Four categories (Taxonomy of extant species, Faunistic inventories and new records, Pest species biology, and Community ecology) represent most of the published research. About 60 percent of the records evaluated correspond to five families (Pentatomidae, Reduviidae, Coreidae, Miridae, and Rhyparochromidae). We emphasize the need to keep working on Heteroptera taxonomy because it will allow further advances in other areas such as phylogenetic analyses, biogeography, ecology, and natural history, among others. The results of our analyses characterize the current state of heteropterology in the region, establishing a baseline for future studies and efforts to broaden the knowledge of the group.

Gender Representation on Editorial Boards of JAMA Network Journals

Objective: Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards of biomedical journals has occurred for decades. The JAMA Network Journals have substantial and broad impact on advances in the biomedical sciences. We sought to determine the current status of gender representation on editorial boards of the 12 JAMA Network Journals. Methods: The gender of each editorial board member of the 12 JAMA Network Journals was classified based on review of online sources. The percentage of women on each board (i.e., number of women relative to total members) was calculated and compared to gender equity and parity benchmarks. The gender equity benchmark for each journal was defined as the percentage of women physicians in the medical specialty reflecting the journal's content based on Association of American Medical Colleges data. The gender parity benchmark for all journals was defined as 50% women. Results: There was considerable variation in the representation of women on the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals relative to gender equity and parity benchmarks. Women were underrepresented on 50% (6 of 12) of boards relative to gender equity and 67% (8 of 12) of boards relative to gender parity. Conclusions: Women were found to be underrepresented on 50% or more of the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals. This finding reflects gender inequities in academic publishing and the broader biomedical enterprise, which limits advances in the biomedical sciences and health care. Those JAMA Network Journals that continue to underrepresent women on their editorial boards are urged to remediate this longstanding issue.

Gender Disparity in Leading Authorship of Critical Care Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In critical care medicine, research trials serve as crucial avenues for disseminating knowledge, influencing clinical practices, and fostering innovation. Notably, a significant gender imbalance exists within this field, potentially mirrored in the authorship of critical care research. This study aimed to investigate an exploration to ascertain the presence and extent of female representation in first and senior authorship roles within critical care literature. To this end, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases for original articles published up to February 2024, coupled with a methodological quality assessment via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and statistical analyses through Review Manager software (RevMan, version 5.4.1, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020). The study's findings, distilled from seven studies included in the final analysis, reveal a pronounced gender disparity. Specifically, in critical care literature examining mixed populations, female first authors were significantly less common than their male counterparts, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.25 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.18-5.68; p < 0.00001). Conversely, pediatric critical care studies did not show a significant difference in gender distribution among first authors (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.31-6.10; p = 0.68). The investigation also highlighted a stark underrepresentation of female senior authors in critical care research across both mixed (OR: 11.67; 95% CI: 7.76-17.56; p < 0.00001) and pediatric populations (OR: 5.41; 95% CI: 1.88-15.56; p = 0.002). These findings underscore the persistent underrepresentation of women in critical care literature authorship and their slow progression into leadership roles, as evidenced by the disproportionately low number of female senior authors.

Understanding scholar-trajectories across scientific periodicals

Despite the rapid growth in the number of scientific publications, our understanding of author publication trajectories remains limited. Here we propose an embedding-based framework for tracking author trajectories in a geometric space that leverages the information encoded in the publication sequences, namely the list of the consecutive publication venues for each scholar. Using the publication histories of approximately 30,000 social media researchers, we obtain a knowledge space that broadly captures essential information about periodicals as well as complex (inter-)disciplinary structures of science. Based on this space, we study academic success through the prism of movement across scientific periodicals. We use a measure from human mobility, the radius of gyration, to characterize individual scholars' trajectories. Results show that author mobility across periodicals negatively correlates with citations, suggesting that successful scholars tend to publish in a relatively proximal range of periodicals. Overall, our framework discovers intricate structures in large-scale sequential data and provides new ways to explore mobility and trajectory patterns.

Gender Inequality in Leadership Positions in Neurology and Neurosurgery Journals and Societies

OBJECTIVE

Gender inequalities persist in several areas of medicine, despite the growing number of female doctors and medical students. In this study, we aimed to reveal the gender inequality in the top journals' editorial boards and national societies' leadership positions in the field of neurology and neurosurgery.

METHOD

This is a cross-sectional study that uses public information accessed through the internet via journals' and academic societies' public websites. The medical journals are selected and included according to their h5-index in the field of neurology and neurosurgery. We evaluated the gender composition of the editorial boards and academic societies' leadership positions.

RESULTS

The female editorial board member ratio was 44.0% in the top 10 neurology journals. However, this ratio was significantly decreased to 29.7% in the other journals(P < 0.001). The top 10 neurosurgery journals had a female editorial board member ratio of 13.7%. This ratio was significantly decreased to 5.3% in the other 10 journals with lower h5-index(P < 0.001). A significantly lower number of female individuals are present in the editorial boards of the neurosurgery journals than in neurology(P < 0.001). The female president or delegate ratio was 19.3% in the World Federation of Neurology-affiliated countries, and it was 4% in the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies-affiliated countries.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, there is a significant gender inequality among editorial board members. The position of neurosurgical societies and journals is far different than the field of neurology. Furthermore, these findings should be evaluated as a continuum of the gender inequality in the professional societies' executive boards and delegates representing the national academical community.

[Awards in pathology-a man's world?]

BACKGROUND

Awards provide their recipients with fame and recognition, and subsequently facilitate publications and acquisition of external funding through increased visibility. We hypothesize that despite increasing representation in pathology, women are underrepresented as awardees in the German Society of Pathology and consequently there is an associated imbalance between genders.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Published data from the German Society of Pathology on female awardees during the period from 2000 to 2022 were examined. Only awards specifically dedicated to the field of pathology were considered. In addition, the publicly available data of the German Medical Association on gender and age distribution of pathologists in Germany were considered as reference material.

RESULTS

A total of six different awards were included in the analysis. Among the 143 awardees across 150 individual awards in the period from 2000 to 2022, 55 (38.4%) of the awardees were female compared to an average percentage of 31% of women working in the field of pathology in the 23-year period under consideration. Consequently, female awardees in pathology were not underrepresented when compared to the national figures on the proportion of women in the field of pathology. However, the distribution of female awardees across individual awards suggests that women were increasingly represented in less prestigious research and doctoral awards, while men made up a large proportion of awardees of honorary awards (0% women) and prestigious awards (17% women).

A Systematic Review of Gender Disparity in the Authorship of Clinical Trials and Clinical Practice Guidelines in Various Medicine Subspecialties

Authorship in clinical trials and clinical practice guidelines is considered prestigious and is associated with broader peer recognition. This systematic review investigated female representation among studies reporting authorship trends in clinical trials or clinical practice guidelines in different medicine subspecialties. Our search strategy yielded 836 articles, of which 30 met the inclusion criteria. Our findings indicate that females are severely underrepresented in authorship of clinical trials and clinical practice guidelines. Although the proportions of females may have improved in the past decade, the gains are marginal. Notably, studies in this domain predominantly focus on first/last authorship positions, and whether females are underrepresented in other positions as collaborative partners is currently unknown. Also, authorship trends in clinical trials or clinical practice guidelines of most medicine subspecialties besides cardiovascular medicine remain under-researched. Hence, standardizing the methodology for studying gender disparity in research output for comparative analysis between different subspecialties is as urgent as addressing the gender disparity in authorship.

Eleven Years of Gender Data Visualization: A Step Towards More Inclusive Gender Representation

We present an analysis of the representation of gender as a data dimension in data visualizations and propose a set of considerations around visual variables and annotations for gender-related data. Gender is a common demographic dimension of data collected from study or survey participants, passengers, or customers, as well as across academic studies, especially in certain disciplines like sociology. Our work contributes to multiple ongoing discussions on the ethical implications of data visualizations. By choosing specific data, visual variables, and text labels, visualization designers may, inadvertently or not, perpetuate stereotypes and biases. Here, our goal is to start an evolving discussion on how to represent data on gender in data visualizations and raise awareness of the subtleties of choosing visual variables and words in gender visualizations. In order to ground this discussion, we collected and coded gender visualizations and their captions from five different scientific communities (Biology, Politics, Social Studies, Visualisation, and Human-Computer Interaction), in addition to images from Tableau Public and the Information Is Beautiful awards showcase. Overall we found that representation types are community-specific, color hue is the dominant visual channel for gender data, and nonconforming gender is under-represented. We end our paper with a discussion of considerations for gender visualization derived from our coding and the literature and recommendations for large data collection bodies. A free copy of this paper and all supplemental materials are available at https://osf.io/v9ams/.

Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia

Gender disparities in science have become a salient concern for policy makers and researchers. Previous studies have documented a gender gap in research productivity and recognition in the sciences, and different reasons for this gap have been proposed. In this study, we examine four academic fields with different proportions of men and women in their population. We address the following questions: What is the relationship between the gendered make-up of a field and the productivity and recognition of men and women scientists in that academic field? What is the relationship between the publication patterns of men and women in different academic fields and their productivity and recognition? We find that gendered patterns of productivity and recognition favour men in man-dominated subfields (Mathematical Physics and Software Engineering), while women were more productive and highly cited in one woman-dominated subfield (Nursing), though not in another (Psychology). Nursing, a woman-gendered field, provides an interesting counterpoint to the most usual findings regarding gender disparities in academia. Our findings highlight the need to disaggregate academic fields and to bring to the forefront other disciplines that remain under investigated in analyses of gender gaps to potentially elucidate conflicting findings in the literature.

Gender imbalances in the editorial activities of a selective journal run by academic editors

The fairness of decisions made at various stages of the publication process is an important topic in meta-research. Here, based on an analysis of data on the gender of authors, editors and reviewers for 23,876 initial submissions and 7,192 full submissions to the journal eLife, we report on five stages of the publication process. We find that the board of reviewing editors (BRE) is men-dominant (69%) and that authors disproportionately suggest male editors when making an initial submission. We do not find evidence for gender bias when Senior Editors consult Reviewing Editors about initial submissions, but women Reviewing Editors are less engaged in discussions about these submissions than expected by their proportion. We find evidence of gender homophily when Senior Editors assign full submissions to Reviewing Editors (i.e., men are more likely to assign full submissions to other men (77% compared to the base assignment rate to men RE of 70%), and likewise for women (41% compared to women RE base assignment rate of 30%))). This tendency was stronger in more gender-balanced scientific disciplines. However, we do not find evidence for gender bias when authors appeal decisions made by editors to reject submissions. Together, our findings confirm that gender disparities exist along the editorial process and suggest that merely increasing the proportion of women might not be sufficient to eliminate this bias. Measures accounting for women's circumstances and needs (e.g., delaying discussions until all RE are engaged) and raising editorial awareness to women's needs may be essential to increasing gender equity and enhancing academic publication.

Scientific production in biodiversity: the gender gap continues in Brazilian universities

Scientometrics enables us to comprehend the interests and trends in scientific knowledge production and dissemination. In this study, we evaluate the effects of gender, academic experience, location of residence, and graduate program score on the quantity of published articles, the number of citations and the H-index of researchers belonging to Brazilian graduate programs in Biodiversity. Variables related to the researchers were measured, and the relevance in explaining scientific production was examined using hierarchical models. In graduate programs, there were more men than females. The number of articles as first author and the H-index increase progressively through the researchers' career, while the number of citations increases at the beginning of their careers, stabilizing between 10 and 20 years, and increasing again after 30 years of career. We concluded that gender, academic experience, and graduate program score were the most important variables in explaining the scientific production of graduate programs in Biodiversity in Brazil.

Perceptions of publication pressure among Hungarian researchers: Differences across career stage, gender, and scientific field

Excessive publication pressure has been associated with detrimental aspects for individual researchers and scientific integrity but has not been well-studied in Eastern European countries. The aim of this study is to assess perceived publication pressure and its relationship with career stage, scientific field, and gender in Hungary. The survey included demographic questions, such as gender, age, scientific field, career stage, and the Revised Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQr). A total of 408 respondents completed the survey, 46% were female, and 54% were male. 45% are PhD students, 17% are postdocs or assistant professors, and 38% are associate or full professors. 31% are from the Biomedical Sciences, 39% from Natural Sciences, 18% from Social Sciences, and 12% from Humanities. Our results showed no significant disciplinary differences in perceived publication pressure. PhD students perceived a greater lack of resources than postdocs and professors. The same applied to postdocs and assistant professors when compared to associate professors. The findings also showed that female researchers perceive greater stress than male researchers. Our study highlights the need to improve mentoring during the development of early-career researchers. It also emphasizes the importance of organizational structures developing policies or strategies to address gender differences in academia.

Ways to get a more balanced gender representation in addiction journals' management and workforce

Although the scientific community, particularly academic publishing, claims to be gender-neutral and based on meritocracy, it mirrors other parts of modern society, wherein residual gender imbalances and implicit and explicit gender biases are reproduced. In this report, we address gender imbalances (in particular, the overrepresentation of men) in the editorial workforce of academic journals as barriers to women's promotion and career progression in addiction science. We also consider potential gender-related elements and biases in the peer-review and editorial decision-making processes, which may result in women's lower publication rates, thereby creating another gender-related barrier to women's promotion, career progression and academic recognition. Establishing a more balanced gender representation in addiction publishing will require the adoption of the SAGER guidelines and the development of Gender Equality Plans for addiction specialty journals. Finally, although our focus concerns gender, the organisational mechanisms identified here also affect other types of heterogeneity and intersectional thinking.

Junior scientists spotlight social bonds in seminars for diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM

Disparities for women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers have continued even amidst mounting evidence for the superior performance of diverse workforces. In response, we launched the Diversity and Science Lecture series, a cross-institutional platform where junior life scientists present their research and comment on diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM. We characterize speaker representation from 79 profiles and investigate topic noteworthiness via quantitative content analysis of talk transcripts. Nearly every speaker discussed interpersonal support, and three-fifths of speakers commented on race or ethnicity. Other topics, such as sexual and gender minority identity, were less frequently addressed but highly salient to the speakers who mentioned them. We found that significantly co-occurring topics reflected not only conceptual similarity, such as terms for racial identities, but also intersectional significance, such as identifying as a Latina/Hispanic woman or Asian immigrant, and interactions between concerns and identities, including the heightened value of friendship to the LGBTQ community, which we reproduce using transcripts from an independent seminar series. Our approach to scholar profiles and talk transcripts serves as an example for transmuting hundreds of hours of scholarly discourse into rich datasets that can power computational audits of speaker diversity and illuminate speakers' personal and professional priorities.