scholarly journals Gender trends in authorships and publication impact in Academic Radiology—a 10-year perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Molwitz ◽  
Jin Yamamura ◽  
Ann-Kathrin Ozga ◽  
Ilka Wedekind ◽  
Thai-An Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Impact Factor Journal ◽  
European Radiology ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
High Ranking ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Female Authorship

Abstract Objectives To analyze the development of publication numbers of female authors in high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals. Methods In this bibliometric analysis, gender of the first (FA) and senior author (SA) was assigned to all original research articles and reviews, published in 10 high-, medium-, and low-impact radiological journals in 2007/8 and 2017/18. The adjusted event rate (AER) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) were calculated using mixed logistic and multinomial logistic regression models to assess and compare female publications according to impact factor, journal, author position, and combination. Results The proportion of female FA and female SA in N = 6979 (2007/2008) and N = 7383 (2017/2018) articles increased to 29.1% and 16.1% in 2017/2018, respectively. While most female authorships were continuously observed in medium-impact journals, the strongest increase occurred for both female FA (AOR 2.0; p < .0001) and SA (AOR 2.1; p < .0001) in low-impact journals. Female SA published significantly more often in a low- (AOR 1.5) or medium- (AOR 1.8) than in a high-ranking journal. Among the high-ranking journals, female FA published most frequently in European Radiology (32.4%; 95% CI [29.3–35.8]; p < .0001), female SA in Investigative Radiology (15.9%; 95% CI [13.7–18.4]; p < .0001). Male same-sex authorships decreased (AOR 0.9), but remained at least twice as common as all-female or mixed authorships. Conclusion The increase in female authorship is reflected in all impact areas. Female FA and SA increased most in low-ranking journals but are most common in medium-ranking journals. Female SA remain rare, especially in high impact journals. Key Points • Compared to the proportion of female radiologists worldwide, female senior authors are underrepresented in all impact areas, in particular in high-impact journals. • Among the included high-ranking radiological journals, female first authors and senior authors were strongest represented in European Radiology and Investigative Radiology, while across all impact areas they mostly published in medium-ranking journals. • Female author combinations were more frequent in low- and medium- than in high-ranking journals, whereas male author combinations remained more common than female senior author collaborations in all impact areas.

scholarly journals Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open access publishing each year

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e047107
Author(s):  
Mallory K. Ellingson ◽  
Xiaoting Shi ◽  
Joshua J. Skydel ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Richard Lehman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Open Access Publishing ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Potential Cost ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Review Articles ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Medical Researchers

ObjectiveTo estimate the financial costs paid by individual medical researchers from meeting the article processing charges (APCs) levied by open access journals in 2019.DesignCross-sectional analysis.Data sourcesScopus was used to generate two random samples of researchers, the first with a senior author article indexed in the ‘Medicine’ subject area (general researchers) and the second with an article published in the ten highest-impact factor general clinical medicine journals (high-impact researchers) in 2019. For each researcher, Scopus was used to identify all first and senior author original research or review articles published in 2019. Data were obtained from Scopus, institutional profiles, Journal Citation Reports, publisher databases, the Directory of Open Access Journals, and individual journal websites.Main outcome measuresMedian APCs paid by general and high-impact researchers for all first and senior author research and review articles published in 2019.ResultsThere were 241 general and 246 high-impact researchers identified as eligible for our study. In 2019, the general and high-impact researchers published a total of 914 (median 2, IQR 1–5) and 1471 (4, 2–8) first or senior author research or review articles, respectively. 42% (384/914) of the articles from the general researchers and 29% (428/1471) of the articles from the high-impact medical researchers were published in fully open access journals. The median total APCs paid by general researchers in 2019 was US$191 (US$0–US$2500) and the median total paid by high-impact researchers was US$2900 (US$0–US$5465); the maximum paid by a single researcher in total APCs was US$30115 and US$34676, respectively.ConclusionsMedical researchers in 2019 were found to have paid between US$0 and US$34676 in total APCs. As journals with APCs become more common, it is important to continue to evaluate the potential cost to researchers, especially on individuals who may not have the funding or institutional resources to cover these costs.

scholarly journals Trends in female authorship in research papers on eating disorders: 20-year bibliometric study

BJPsych Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Strand ◽  
Cynthia M. Bulik
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Eating Disorder ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Clinical Psychology ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
The Past ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
Observation Period

BackgroundThere is a clear gender gap in scientific authorship. Although the proportions of female authors in medicine and psychiatry have increased over the past decades, women are still underrepresented.AimsTo analyse authorship gender trends in eating disorder research.MethodFirst and last author gender in research articles on eating disorders during the period 1997–2016 were assessed in eating disorder specialty journals, high-impact psychiatry journals and high-impact clinical psychology journals.ResultsThe total number of papers on eating disorders increased substantially over the observation period, although a decrease was observed in high-impact psychiatry journals. Female authorship increased in both specialty journals and high-impact psychiatry journals. Authors were significantly less likely to be female in high-impact psychiatry and clinical psychology journals than in speciality journals.ConclusionsEating disorder research has been increasingly allocated to specialty journals over the past 20 years. A consistent gender gap between specialty and high-impact journals exists.Declaration of interestC.M.B is a grant recipient from Shire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and has participated as a member of their scientific advisory board. These positions are unrelated to the content of this article.

scholarly journals Sex differences in cardiovascular research

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
D N Millenaar ◽  
M Dillmann ◽  
T Fehlmann ◽  
A Flohr ◽  
R Mehran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Senior Author ◽  
Cardiovascular Research ◽  
National Budget ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Funding Sources ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Average Impact ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
Public Grant ◽  
Number Of Citations

Abstract Background Women are underrepresented in cardiovascular publications. We sought to investigate sex-specific differences in cardiovascular research over the last decade. Methods and results All 387,463 cardiovascular publications between 2010–2019 were retrieved from Web-of-Science and analyzed regarding the authors' sex, the average impact factor (IF), the number of citations, co-authors per article, and international collaborations. The number of cardiovascular research articles increased between 2010–2019 from 19,960 to 29,604 articles per year. The number of articles written by female first authors increased by 48.3% (6434 articles in 2010 and 11,343 articles in 2019) and by 35.0% for male first authors (13,526 articles in 2010 and 18,261 articles in 2019). The last/senior author was more likely to be female in articles with female first authors compared with male first authors (28.2% vs. 14.1%; odds ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval 2.43–2.53, p&lt;0.001). The average IF for articles by female first authors was lower compared to male (3.1±3.8 vs. 3.5±4.9, p&lt;0.001). Likewise, the H-Index was lower for female than male first authors (1.07±0.74 vs. 1.25±0.98, p&lt;0.001), as was the number of citations per articles (14.0±31.1 vs. 18.0±68.8 citations, p&lt;0.001). Female first authors had fewer co-authors per article than their male peers (7.4±19.6 vs. 8.2±35.2; p&lt;0.001) and were less represented in articles with &gt;15 co-authors (3,623 articles by female and 8,941 by male first authors; ratio female to male 0.41). Scientific advancement as the ratio between female to male first authorships was highest in publications from Latin America (ratio 0.92) and lowest in Asia (ratio 0.40). Female authorship articles reached the highest IF in North America (average IF 3.7), the lowest Africa (average IF 1.8). Conclusions Publications in cardiovascular research have increased over the last decade, particularly by female authors. Female researchers are cited less often compared with their male peers and publish with fewer co-authors. The IF remains lower for articles by female researchers. Efforts to further increase women-led research activities are needed FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): German Cardiac SocietyGerman Research Foundation (DFG)

scholarly journals Women’s role in neurosurgical research: is the gender gap improving?

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. E6
Author(s):  
Marta Pastor-Cabeza ◽  
Ramon Torné ◽  
Roser García-Armengol ◽  
Belén Menéndez-Osorio ◽  
Alejandra Mosteiro-Cadaval ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
Role Models ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Unconscious Bias ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
Female Candidates ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
The Us ◽  
Female Authorship

OBJECTIVEThe percentage of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research might be perceived as a representation of our specialty and may influence the perpetuation of the existing gender gap. This study investigated whether the trend in women taking lead roles in neurosurgical research has mirrored the increase in female neurosurgeons during the past decade and whether our most prestigious publications portray enough female role models to stimulate gender diversity among the new generation of neurosurgeons.METHODSTwo of the most prominent neurosurgical journals—Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery—were selected for this study, and every original article that was published in 2009 and 2019 in each of those journals was investigated according to the gender of the first and senior authors, their academic titles, their affiliations, and their institutions’ region.RESULTSA total of 1328 articles were analyzed. The percentage of female authors was significantly higher in Europe and Russia compared with the US and Canada (first authors: 60/302 [19.9%] vs 109/829 [13.1%], p = 0.005; and senior authors: 32/302 [10.6%] vs 57/829 [6.9%], p = 0.040). Significantly increased female authorship was observed from 2009 to 2019, and overall numbers of both first and senior female authors almost doubled. However, when analyzing by regions, female authorship increased significantly only in the US and Canada. Female authors of neurosurgical research articles were significantly less likely to hold an MD degree compared with men. Female neurosurgeons serving as senior authors were represented in only 3.6% (48/1328) of articles. Women serving as senior authors were more likely to have a female colleague listed as the first author of their research (29/97 [29.9%] vs 155/1231 [12.6%]; χ2 = 22.561, p = 0.001).CONCLUSIONSAlthough this work showed an encouraging increase in the number of women publishing high-impact neurosurgical research, the stagnant trend in Europe may suggest that a glass ceiling has been reached and further advances in equity would require more aggressive measures. The differences in the researchers’ profiles (academic title and affiliation) suggest an even wider gender gap. Cultural unconscious bias may explain why female senior authors have more than double the number of women serving as their junior authors compared with men. While changes in the workforce happen, strategies such as publishing specific issues on women, encouraging female editorials, and working toward more gender-balanced editorial boards may help our journals to portray a more equitable specialty that would not discourage bright female candidates.

scholarly journals Increases in female academic productivity and female mentorship highlight sustained progress in previously identified neurosurgical gender disparities

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. E3
Author(s):  
Birra Taha ◽  
Praneeth Sadda ◽  
Graham Winston ◽  
Eseosa Odigie ◽  
Cristina Londono ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Steady Increase ◽  
Prediction Methods ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Rate Of Increase ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
Operative Neurosurgery ◽  
Over Time

OBJECTIVEA meta-analysis was performed to understand disparities in the representation of female authorship within the neurosurgical literature and implications for career advancement of women in neurosurgery.METHODSAuthor names for articles published in 16 of the top neurosurgical journals from 2002 to 2019 were obtained from MEDLINE. The gender of each author was determined using automated prediction methods. Publication trends were compared over time and across subdisciplines. Female authorship was also compared to the proportionate composition of women in the field over time.RESULTSThe metadata obtained from 16 major neurosurgical journals yielded 66,546 research articles. Gender was successfully determined for 96% (127,809/133,578) of first and senior authors, while the remainder (3.9%) were unable to be determined through prediction methods. Across all years, 13.3% (8826) of articles had female first authorship and 9.1% (6073) had female senior authorship. Female first authorship increased significantly over time from 5.8% in 2002 to 17.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Female senior authorship also increased significantly over time, from 5.5% in 2002 to 12.0% in 2019 (p < 0.001). The journals with the highest proportions of female first authors and senior authors were the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics (33.5%) and the Asian Journal of Neurosurgery (23.8%), respectively. Operative Neurosurgery had the lowest fraction of female first (12.4%) and senior (4.7%) authors. There was a significant difference between the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical trainees and the year-by-year proportion of female neurosurgical first (p < 0.001) and senior (p < 0.001) authors. Articles were also more likely to have a female first author if the senior author of the article was female (OR 2.69, CI 2.52–2.86; p < 0.001). From 1944 to 2019, the Journal of Neurosurgery showed a steady increase in female first and senior authorship, with a plateau beginning in the 1990s.CONCLUSIONSLarge meta-analysis techniques have the potential to effectively leverage large amounts of bibliometric data to quantify the representation of female authorship in the neurosurgical literature. The proportion of female authors in major neurosurgical journals has steadily increased. However, the rate of increase in female senior authorship has lagged behind the rate of increase in first authorship, indicating a disparity in academic advancement in women in neurosurgery.

scholarly journals Gender Differences in Publication Authorship During COVID‐19: A Bibliometric Analysis of High‐Impact Cardiology Journals

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ersilia M. DeFilippis ◽  
Lauren Sinnenberg ◽  
Nadim Mahmud ◽  
Malissa J. Wood ◽  
Sharonne N. Hayes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
European Heart Journal ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Academic Careers ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Bibliometric Data ◽  
Representation Of Women

Background The purpose of this study was to examine gender differences in authorship of manuscripts in select high‐impact cardiology journals during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Methods and Results All manuscripts published between March 1, 2019 to June 1, 2019 and March 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 in 4 high‐impact cardiology journals ( Journal of the American College of Cardiology , Circulation , JAMA Cardiology , and European Heart Journal ) were identified using bibliometric data. Authors' genders were determined by matching first name with predicted gender using a validated multinational database (Genderize.io) and manual adjudication. Proportions of women and men first, co‐first, senior, and co‐senior authors, manuscript types, and whether the manuscript was COVID‐19 related were recorded. In 2019, women were first authors of 176 (22.3%) manuscripts and senior authors of 99 (15.0%) manuscripts. In 2020, women first authored 230 (27.4%) manuscripts and senior authored 138 (19.3%) manuscripts. Proportions of woman first and senior authors were significantly higher in 2020 compared with 2019. Women were more likely to be first authors if the manuscript's senior author was a woman (33.8% for woman first/woman senior versus 23.4% for woman first/man senior; P <0.001). Women were less likely to be first authors of COVID‐19‐related original research manuscripts ( P =0.04). Conclusions Representation of women as key authors of manuscripts published in major cardiovascular journals increased during the early COVID‐19 pandemic compared with similar months in 2019. However, women were significantly less likely to be first authors of COVID‐19‐related original research manuscripts. Future investigation into the gender‐disparate impacts of COVID‐19 on academic careers is critical.

scholarly journals Diversity in high-impact psychiatric publishing: gender parity within reach?

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gmeiner Andrea ◽  
Trimmel Melanie ◽  
Gaglia-Essletzbichler Amy ◽  
Schrank Beate ◽  
Süßenbacher-Kessler Stefanie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Impact ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Gender Parity ◽  
Publishing World ◽  
Geographic Diversity ◽  
Female Authorship ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
First Time

AbstractGender parity and authorship diversity are declared goals in the publishing world. This study assessed the progress of authorship gender distribution over a quarter of a century and geographic diversity over the last 15 years in high-impact psychiatric journals. All articles published in 2019 in the American Journal of Psychiatry, the British Journal of Psychiatry, and JAMA Psychiatry were included and compared with data from three points in time starting in 1994. Descriptive statistics were gathered, and chi-square tests were performed. All tests were conducted as two-tailed, and p-values < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Inter-rater reliability was calculated via Cohen’s kappa. In 2019 a total of 473 articles were published. Forty percent of all authors, 42.3% of first authors, and 29.4% of senior authors were female. Counting original research articles only, female first authorship reached 50.4%. In the 25-year period between 1994 and 2019, female first (p < .001), female senior (p < .001), and female overall (p < .001) authorship has increased. In the specific period between 2014 and 2019, overall female senior authorship in all articles (p = .940) as well as first (p = .101) and senior (p = .157) in original research plateaued. In non-original research articles, female first authorship was higher in 2019 compared to 2014 (p = .014), whilst female senior authorship plateaued (p = .154). Geographic diversity was low and did not change over time. Gender parity in the subcategory original research articles was reached for the first time in 2019. Senior female authorship and geographic diversity remain areas of concern that need further investigation and specific interventions.

scholarly journals Prevalence and determinants of diabetes and prediabetes in southwestern Iran: the Khuzestan comprehensive health study (KCHS)

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanam Hariri ◽  
Zahra Rahimi ◽  
Nahid Hashemi-Madani ◽  
Seyyed Ali Mard ◽  
Farnaz Hashemi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Family History ◽  
Waist Circumference ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Fasting Blood Glucose ◽  
Health Study ◽  
Khuzestan Province ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Relative Risks ◽  
Southwestern Iran

Background The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is postulated to have the highest increase in the prevalence of diabetes by 2030; however, studies on the epidemiology of diabetes are rather limited across the region, including in Iran. Methods This study was conducted between 2016 and 2018 among Iranian adults aged 20 to 65 years residing in Khuzestan province, southwestern Iran. Diabetes was defined as the fasting blood glucose (FBG) level of 126 mg/dl or higher, and/or taking antidiabetic medications, and/or self-declared diabetes. Prediabetes was defined as FBG 100 to 125 mg/dl. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to examine the association of multiple risk factors that attained significance on the outcome. Results Overall, 30,498 participants were recruited; the mean (±SD) age was 41.6 (±11.9) years. The prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes were 30.8 and 15.3%, respectively. We found a similar prevalence of diabetes in both sexes, although it was higher among illiterates, urban residents, married people, and smokers. Participants aged 50–65 and those with Body Mass Index (BMI) 30 kg/m2 or higher were more likely to be affected by diabetes [RR: 20.5 (18.1,23.3) and 3.2 (3.0,3.6)]. Hypertension [RR: 5.1 (4.7,5.5)], waist circumference (WC) equal or more than 90 cm [RR: 3.6 (3.3,3.9)], and family history [RR: 2.3 (2.2,2.5)] were also significantly associated with diabetes. For prediabetes, the main risk factors were age 50 to 65 years [RR: 2.6 (2.4,2.8)], BMI 30 kg/m2 or higher [RR: 1.9 (1.8,2.0)], hypertension and WC of 90 cm or higher [RR: 1.7 (1.6,1.8)]. The adjusted relative risks for all variables were higher in females than males, with the exception of family history for both conditions and waist circumference for prediabetes. Conclusions Prediabetes and diabetes are prevalent in southwestern Iran. The major determinants are older age, obesity, and the presence of hypertension. Further interventions are required to escalate diabetes prevention and diagnosis in high-risk areas across Iran.

scholarly journals Transitions in hookah (Waterpipe) smoking by U.S. sexual minority adults between 2013 and 2015: the population assessment of tobacco and health study wave 1 and wave 2

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Rezk-Hanna ◽  
Ian W. Holloway ◽  
Joy Toyama ◽  
Umme Shefa Warda ◽  
Lorree Catherine Berteau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Health Study ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Population Assessment ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Global Epidemic ◽  
Product Use ◽  
Hookah Smoking ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
And Gender

Abstract Background Tobacco smoking using a hookah (i.e., waterpipe) is a global epidemic. While evidence suggests that sexual minorities (SM) have higher odds of hookah use compared to heterosexuals, little is known about their hookah use patterns and transitions. We sought to examine transitions between hookah smoking and use of other tobacco and electronic (e-) products among SM adults aged 18 years of age and older versus their heterosexual counterparts. Methods We analyzed nationally representative data of ever and current hookah smokers from Wave 1 (2013–2014; ever use n = 1014 SM and n = 9462 heterosexuals; current use n = 144 SM and n = 910 heterosexuals) and Wave 2 (2014–2015; ever use n = 901 SM and n = 8049 heterosexuals; current use n = 117 SM and n = 602 heterosexuals) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study. Comparisons between groups and gender subgroups within SM identity groups were determined with Rao-Scott chi-square tests and multivariable survey-weighted multinomial logistic regression models were estimated for transition patterns and initiation of electronic product use in Wave 2. Results Ever and current hookah smoking among SM adults (ever use Wave 1: 29% and Wave 2: 31%; current use Wave 1: 4% and Wave 2: 3%) was higher than heterosexuals (ever use Wave 1: 16% and Wave 2: 16%; current use Wave 1: 1% and Wave 2: 1%; both p < 0.0001). Among SM adults who reported hookah use at Wave 1, 46% quit hookah use at Wave 2; 39% continued hookah use and did not transition to other products while 36% of heterosexual adults quit hookah use at Wave 2 and 36% continued hookah use and did not transition to other products. Compared with heterosexuals, SM adults reported higher use of hookah plus e-products (Wave 2 usage increased by 65 and 83%, respectively). Conclusions Compared to heterosexuals, in addition to higher rates of hookah smoking, higher percentages of SM adults transitioned to hookah plus e-product use between 2013 and 2015. Results have implications for stronger efforts to increase awareness of the harmful effects of hookah as well as vaping, specifically tailored among SM communities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document