Intersectional inequalities in science

The US scientific workforce is primarily composed of White men. Studies have demonstrated the systemic barriers preventing women and other minoritized populations from gaining entry to science; few, however, have taken an intersectional perspective and examined the consequences of these inequalities on scientific knowledge. We provide a large-scale bibliometric analysis of the relationship between intersectional identities, topics, and scientific impact. We find homophily between identities and topic, suggesting a relationship between diversity in the scientific workforce and expansion of the knowledge base. However, topic selection comes at a cost to minoritized individuals for whom we observe both between- and within-topic citation disadvantages. To enhance the robustness of science, research organizations should provide adequate resources to historically underfunded research areas while simultaneously providing access for minoritized individuals into high-prestige networks and topics.

The rapid, massive growth of COVID-19 authors in the scientific literature

We examined the extent to which the scientific workforce in different fields was engaged in publishing COVID-19-related papers. According to Scopus (data cut, 1 August 2021), 210 183 COVID-19-related publications included 720 801 unique authors, of which 360 005 authors had published at least five full papers in their career and 23 520 authors were at the top 2% of their scientific subfield based on a career-long composite citation indicator. The growth of COVID-19 authors was far more rapid and massive compared with cohorts of authors historically publishing on H1N1, Zika, Ebola, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. All 174 scientific subfields had some specialists who had published on COVID-19. In 109 of the 174 subfields of science, at least one in 10 active, influential (top 2% composite citation indicator) authors in the subfield had authored something on COVID-19. Fifty-three hyper-prolific authors had already at least 60 (and up to 227) COVID-19 publications each. Among the 300 authors with the highest composite citation indicator for their COVID-19 publications, most common countries were USA ( n = 67), China ( n = 52), UK ( n = 32) and Italy ( n = 18). The rapid and massive involvement of the scientific workforce in COVID-19-related work is unprecedented and creates opportunities and challenges. There is evidence for hyper-prolific productivity.

The imperative to find the courage to redesign the biomedical research enterprise

Medical research aims to improve health for everyone. While its advances are undeniable, the pace and cost of the progress are not optimal. For example, independent analyses concluded that at least half of the published biomedical research findings are irreproducible, and most scientific papers are never read or cited. This paper examines biomedical research holistically, as a system of incentives that shape the behavior of scientists, administrators, publishers, and funders, and are detrimental to medical progress. We identify opportunities to change and improve those incentives by altering the way research output is disseminated and evaluated, and recommend transparent, data-driven measures of methodological rigor, reproducibility, and societal value of scientific discoveries. Embracing these opportunities would maximize our investments in biomedical research and optimize its value to human health, while simultaneously increasing freedom, creativity, and satisfaction of the scientific workforce.

Participation of women in science in the developed and developing worlds: inverted U of feminization of the scientific workforce, gender equity and retention

We consider various factors impacting the participation of women in science throughout the world, with a particular emphasis on developing countries. For the world as a whole, we find that when the percentage of women working in science in a country is plotted vs. the per capita GDP of the country (adjusted for purchasing power parity) the data fall on an inverted U-shaped ‘boomerang’ curve. Thus, as per capita wealth increases, the percentage of women in science first increases and then falls. This is in marked contrast to the (right-side-up) U-shaped curve that is well-established for the participation of women in the labor force as a whole, suggesting that there are factors in the culture of science that result in opposing trends to those observed in the general workforce. This also results in many developing countries having a much higher participation of women in the scientific workforce than is seen in economically developed countries. Contradicting previous reports to the contrary, we find a positive correlation between gender equality in science and the degree of overall gender equity in the country. Thus, we do not find evidence for the claim that greater gender equity results in the manifestation of innate gender differences in preferences for science. We find differing patterns of retention in science for women in developing and developed countries. We also briefly discuss other factors that make it difficult for women in developing countries to follow a scientific career, or to advance in their careers.

Introduction to effective mentorship for early-career research scientists

Diversifying the scientific workforce remains a national priority due to the continued lack of representation from underrepresented individuals in STEM fields. Quality mentoring has been identified as a stimulus to enhance not only research success, but also recruitment and retention of underrepresented groups pursuing STEM careers. Utilizing the Entering Mentoring training curriculum framework, this report provides a brief synopsis and key takeaways from the 2019 NIH-ASCB Accomplishing Career Transition (ACT) workshop, “Introduction to Effective Mentorship for Scientists” for 30 senior postdoctoral and early-career faculty researchers from historically underrepresented racial and ethnicity backgrounds. In addition, effective strategies and best practices to enhance STEM mentoring for early-career researchers are provided, which have practical applications for diverse mentoring relationships across disciplines, career stages, and mentee types.

Introducing the MAVEN Leadership Training Initiative to diversify the scientific workforce

Addressing gender and racial-ethnic disparities at all career stages is a priority for the research community. In this article, we focus on efforts to encourage mid-career women, particularly women of color, to move into leadership positions in science and science policy. We highlight the need to strengthen leadership skills for the critical period immediately following promotion to associate/tenured professor – when formal career development efforts taper off while institutional demands escalate – and describe a program called MAVEN that has been designed to teach leadership skills to mid-career women scientists, particularly those from underrepresented groups.