Analysis of Female Authorship in Two Transplant Journals: Is There a Gender Gap?

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.

Download Full-text

The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine ◽

10.1258/jrsm.2009.080378 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 102 (8) ◽

pp. 337-342 ◽

Cited By ~ 103

Author(s):

Reena Sidhu ◽

Praveen Rajashekhar ◽

Victoria L Lavin ◽

Joanne Parry ◽

James Attwood ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United Kingdom ◽

British Journal ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Self Report ◽

Web Based ◽

Publication Rates ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Engineering And Technology ◽

Female Authorship ◽

And Gender

Summary Objectives A shortfall exists of female doctors in senior academic posts in the United Kingdom. Career progression depends on measures of esteem, including publication in prestigious journals. This study investigates gender differences in first and senior authorship in six peer-reviewed British journals and factors that are associated with publication rates. Design and main outcome measures Data was collected on United Kingdom first and senior authors who had published in the British Medical Journal, Lancet, British Journal of Surgery, Gut, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and the Archives of Diseases in Childhood. Authorship and gender were quantified for 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2004 ( n=6457). In addition, selected questions from the Athena Survey of Science Engineering and Technology (ASSET2006), web-based doctor's self-report of publications were also analysed ( n=1162). Results Female first authors increased from 10.5% in 1970 to 36.5% in 2004 (p<0.001) while female senior authors only increased from 12.3% to 16.5% (p=0.046). Within individual journals, the largest rise was in British Journal of Obstetric and Gynaecology with 4.5- and 3-fold increases for first and senior authors, respectively. In contrast, female senior authors marginally declined in Gut and Lancet by 2.8% and 2.2%, respectively. ASSET2006 identified that female respondents who were parents were less likely to have publications as sole (p=0.02) and joint authors (p<0.001) compared to male respondents. Female respondents with care responsibilities for parents/partner also had less publications as lead authors compared to those without carer responsibilities (p<0.001). Conclusion The increase in UK female first authors is encouraging. In contrast, there is considerable lag and in some specialties a decline in female senior authors. Factors that could narrow the gender gap in authorship should be sought and addressed.

Download Full-text

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

Neurosurgical FOCUS ◽

10.3171/2020.12.focus20911 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Women in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery: An Analysis of Female Authorship in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery Over the Last 10 Years

The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery ◽

10.1177/0748806821991416 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 074880682199141

Author(s):

Pari Swarnkar ◽

Vikram Sinha ◽

Carole Spake ◽

Joseph Crozier ◽

Ledibabari M. Ngaage ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Plastic Surgery ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Aesthetic Surgery ◽

Gender Disparity ◽

Fisher Exact Test ◽

Linear Regression Models ◽

Chi Square ◽

Exact Test ◽

Female Authorship ◽

Number Of Authors

There is a significant gender gap in research conducted by women in plastic surgery. Previous work has not explored female authorship trends in cosmetic plastic surgery. We asked how authorship trends in cosmetic plastic surgery compare with those in plastic surgery overall, over the last 10 years. All the articles published in Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (JPRAS), Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine (JAMA facial plastics), and Aesthetic Surgery Journal. (ASJ) in 2009, 2014, and 2019 were retrieved. The gender of the first and last author was determined. In addition, article type and total number of authors were extracted. Chi-square or Fisher exact test were performed to determine differences between groups Linear regression models were used to investigate whether total number of authors, or female last authorship predicted female first authorship. A total of 4358 articles were reviewed. Of these, 16.6% (n = 723) were published by a female first and/or last author. Percent of female first and/or last author increased with time, from only 12.2% in 2008, to 15.9% in 2014, reaching 21.7% in 2019. A total of 25% (n = 181) of randomized controlled trials were published by a female first and/or last author compared with only 14% (n = 440) of case studies. Female first and last authorship both increased across the 10-year study period, but there were consistently more female first authors than female last authors in all 3 surveyed years ( P < .001). There was an 86% increased chance of female first authorship if the last author was also female ( P < .001), and a 7% increased likelihood of female first authorship ( P = .002). Women have a lower representation in the cosmetic plastic surgery literature than men. This gender disparity gap, however, is decreasing. While encouraging, opportunities for improvement remain.

Download Full-text

Gender Disparities in the Author Bylines of Articles Published in Clinical Neuropsychology Journals from 1985 to 2019

10.31234/osf.io/2hqwe ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Anastasia Matchanova ◽

Michelle A. Babicz ◽

Jennifer L. Thompson ◽

Briana Johnson ◽

Irene J. Ke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gender Bias ◽

Gender Gap ◽

Women In Leadership ◽

Gender Disparities ◽

Leadership Roles ◽

Women Authors ◽

Clinical Neuropsychology ◽

Representation Of Women ◽

Female Authorship ◽

Child Neuropsychology

Objective: Women are becoming more prevalent in clinical neuropsychology, but gender bias and disparities persist across multiple professional domains. This study examined potential gender disparities in historical authorship trends across commonly read journals in clinical neuropsychology. Method: Analyses were conducted on 10,531 articles published in six clinical neuropsychology journals from 1985 to 2019. Each author was coded as either a man or a woman using the OpenGenderTracking Project database. Results: On average, women comprised 43.3% ( 30.6) of the authors listed in clinical neuropsychology article bylines and were lead and/or corresponding author on 50.3% of these papers. Findings varied by journal, with Child Neuropsychology having the best representation of women across several study metrics. Women comprised an increasing proportion of authors over time and the gender gap in clinical neuropsychology is smaller than was recently reported for the broader field of psychology; nevertheless, the recent rates of female authorship lag behind the prevalence of women in clinical neuropsychology. Encouragingly, gender was not associated with the number of times an article was cited. Articles that included women in leadership roles had significantly more authors overall and specifically more women authors. Conclusions: Women are under-represented as authors in clinical neuropsychology journals, but they are becoming more common and their papers are cited just as frequently as their male colleagues. Efforts to increase women as research mentors and sponsors may help to further close the publishing gender gap in clinical neuropsychology.

Download Full-text