scholarly journals Trends in gender of authors of original research in oncology among major medical journals: a retrospective bibliometric study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e046618
Author(s):  
Shing Fung Lee ◽  
Daniel Redondo Sánchez ◽  
María‑José Sánchez ◽  
Bizu Gelaye ◽  
Chi Leung Chiang ◽  
...  

ObjectiveWe evaluated the temporal trend in gender ratios of first and last authors in the field of oncological research published in major general medical and oncology journals and examined the gender pattern in coauthorship.DesignWe conducted a retrospective study in PubMed using the R package RISmed. We retrieved original research articles published in four general medical journals and six oncology specialty journals. These journals were selected based on their impact factors and popularity among oncologists. We identified the names of first and last authors from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2019. The gender of the authors was identified and validated using the Gender API database (https://gender-api.com/).Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe percentages of first and last authors by gender and the gender ratios (male to female) and temporal trends in gender ratios of first and last authors were determined.ResultsWe identified 34 624 research articles, in which 32 452 had the gender of both first and last authors identified. Among these 11 650 (33.6%) had women as the first author and 7908 (22.8%) as the last author, respectively. The proportion of female first and last authors increased from 26.6% and 16.2% in 2002, to 32.9% and 27.5% in 2019, respectively. However, the gender ratio (male to female) of first and last authors decreased by 1.5% and 2.6% per year, respectively, which were statistically significant (first author: incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.00; last author: IRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). Male first and last authorship was the most common combination. Male–female and female–female pairs increased by 2.0% and 5.0%, respectively (IRR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03 and IRR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06, respectively).ConclusionsThe continued under-representation of women means that more efforts to address parity for advancement of women in academic oncology are needed.

Author(s):  
David Ouyang ◽  
David Sing ◽  
Sonia Shah ◽  
Robert Harrington ◽  
Fatima Rodriguez

Background: Despite advances in the representation of women in medical training, women continue to be underrepresented in cardiology, academic medicine, and senior positions within academic medicine. This study seeks to determine the representation of female physician-investigators in cardiology through review of published literature in three prominent cardiology journals over time. Understanding disparities in research productivity can highlight barriers to female representation in academic cardiology. Methods: Authors of original research articles between 1980 and 2017 from three high impact cardiology journals (Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, and European Heart Journal) were extracted from PubMed. Author sex were determined and the proportion of female first and senior authors were calculated for consecutive time cohorts. Results: We identified 78,558 unique authors of 55,085 primary research articles. Female authors accounted for 33.1% of all authors, however they represented only 26.7% of first authors and 19.7% of senior authors (p < 0.001 for both). Looking at the most prolific authors, female authors are also underrepresented, accounting for only 5% of the top 100 authors. Conclusions: Using a large database of published manuscripts, we found that female representation in cardiology research has increased over the last four decades. However there is still disproportionate underrepresentation in first authorship, senior authorship and in authors with the most publications. In addition to recruiting more women into cardiology, further efforts should be made to identify and address barriers in advancement for female physician-scientists.


2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. 437-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek M McKay ◽  
Sandra Daniels

The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) postdoctoral fellowship programme was initiated in 1992 with the goal of promoting excellence in Canadian gastroenterological research. With backing from multiple pharmaceutical partners and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, 87 fellows were funded over the next ten years for a total investment of $8,730,101. Between 1992 and 2000, fellows authored 247 articles; 176 being original research articles, 31 (17.5%) of which appeared in journals with impact factors of greater than 10. As testament to the program’s success in developing young scientists, 31 former fellows (36%) have progressed to faculty positions. The fellowship programme continues to be an outstanding success and the flagship of CAG research activities.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. e0240288
Author(s):  
Nicole Heßler ◽  
Miriam Rottmann ◽  
Andreas Ziegler

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS ◽  
IJEISR ISJ

International Journal of Engineering, IT and Scientific Research (IJEISR) is an Open Access international journal. We publish original research articles that are peer reviewed, and contain latest innovative cutting edge information articles on all aspects of Engineering, IT and Scientific Research. The coverage ranges across the research at various levels in connection with innovative tools for the development of advanced Engineering, IT and Scientific Research. Available online at https://int-scientific-journals.com


Conservation ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-20
Author(s):  
Antoni Margalida ◽  
Luca Luiselli ◽  
José L. Tella ◽  
Shuqing Zhao

We are pleased to launch the new peer-reviewed open access journal, Conservation, published by MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute), which offers an exciting new opportunity to publish comprehensive reviews, original research articles, communications, case reports, letters, commentaries, and other perspectives related to the biological, sociological, ethical, economic, methodological, and other transdisciplinary dimensions of conservation [...]


Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 438
Author(s):  
Jagadish Hosmani ◽  
Shazia Mushtaq ◽  
Shahabe Saquib Abullais ◽  
Hussain Mohammed Almubarak ◽  
Khalil Assiri ◽  
...  

Background and Objectives: Oral cancer is the 6th most common cancer in the world and oral leukoplakia is an oral potentially malignant disorder that could develop into oral cancer. This systematic review focusses on randomized clinical trials for recombinant adenovirus p-53 (rAD-p53) therapy for the treatment of oral leukoplakia and cancer. Materials and Methods: We searched for research articles on various databases such as Pubmed/Medline, Embase, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infra-structure), Springerlink, cochrane and Web of sciences from 2003 to 2020. MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms were used for the search. Inclusion criteria included original research, randomized clinical trials and articles only in English language. Exclusion criteria were any articles that were not research articles, not randomized trials, non-human studies, etc. The articles were further graded on the Jadad scale. Results: 578 articles were assessed from various databases; only 3 articles were found to be appropriate for this review. Thus, meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity and lack of data. In the three studies, whether rAD-p53 was used as a standalone therapy or with other therapies, there was a beneficial effect of the therapy. Furthermore, there were no serious adverse events and the only adverse events reported were fever, pain at the local injection site, flu-like symptoms and lowered WBC count. Conclusions: Thus, we can conclude that this therapy has a potential for beneficial therapeutic effects and further clinical trials with more patients need to be performed to get better understanding of the effect of rAD-p53 therapy, which probably will pave the way to its approval in other parts of the world.


2015 ◽  
Vol 204 (6) ◽  
pp. 1152-1156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew B. Rosenkrantz ◽  
Mukesh Harisinghani

2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-144
Author(s):  
Jaykaran Charan ◽  
Deepak Saxena ◽  
Preeti Yadav ◽  
N. D. Kantharia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e051224
Author(s):  
Vaidehi Misra ◽  
Frozan Safi ◽  
Kathryn A Brewerton ◽  
Wei Wu ◽  
Robin Mason ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEvaluate gender differences in authorship of COVID-19 articles in high-impact medical journals compared with other topics.DesignCross-sectional review.Data sourcesMedline database.Eligibility criteriaArticles published from 1 January to 31 December 2020 in the seven leading general medical journals by impact factor. Article types included primary research, reviews, editorials and commentaries.Data extractionKey data elements were whether the study topic was related to COVID-19 and names of the principal and the senior authors. A hierarchical approach was used to determine the likely gender of authors. Logistic regression assessed the association of study characteristics, including COVID-19 status, with authors’ likely gender; this was quantified using adjusted ORs (aORs).ResultsWe included 2252 articles, of which 748 (33.2%) were COVID-19-related and 1504 (66.8%) covered other topics. A likely gender was determined for 2138 (94.9%) principal authors and 1890 (83.9%) senior authors. Men were significantly more likely to be both principal (1364 men; 63.8%) and senior (1332 men; 70.5%) authors. COVID-19-related articles were not associated with the odds of men being principal (aOR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; p=0.89) or senior authors (aOR 0.96; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; p=0.71) relative to other topics. Articles with men as senior authors were more likely to have men as principal authors (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.83; p<0.001). Men were more likely to author articles reporting original research and those with corresponding authors based outside the USA and Europe.ConclusionsWomen were substantially under-represented as authors among articles in leading medical journals; this was not significantly different for COVID-19-related articles. Study limitations include potential for misclassification bias due to the name-based analysis. Results suggest that barriers to women’s authorship in high-impact journals during COVID-19 are not significantly larger than barriers that preceded the pandemic and that are likely to continue beyond it.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020186702.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document