Gender bias in clinical case reports: A cross-sectional study of the “big five” medical journals

Allotey, Pascale; Allotey-Reidpath, Caitlin D; Reidpath, Daniel D.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177386

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While male bias in case reports has been previously reported (9), this is the first study to examine this in Covid-19-related case studies. The overrepresentation of male patients in Covid-19 case reports may be reflective of sex differences in disease prevalence, severity, and immune response (13,14).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Sex and Gender Bias in Covid-19 Clinical Case Reports

Salter-Volz

Oyasu

Chen

et al. 2021

Front. Glob. Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical case reports circulate relevant information regarding disease presentation and describe treatment protocols, particularly for novel conditions. In the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, case reports provided key insights into the pathophysiology and sequelae associated with Covid-19 infection and described treatment mechanisms and outcomes. However, case reports are often subject to selection bias due to their singular nature. To better understand how selection biases may have influenced Covid-19-releated case reports, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of Covid-19-releated case reports published in high impact journals from January 1 to June 1, 2020. Case reports were coded for patient sex, country of institutional affiliation, physiological system, and first and last author gender. Of 494 total case reports, 45% (n = 221) of patients were male, 30% (n = 146) were female, and 25% (n = 124) included both sexes. Ratios of male-only to female-only case reports varied by physiological system. The majority of case reports had male first (61%, n = 302) and last (70%, n = 340) authors. Case reports with male last authors were more likely to describe male patients [X2 (2, n = 465) = 6.6, p = 0.037], while case reports with female last authors were more likely to include patients of both sexes [OR = 1.918 (95% CI = 1.163–3.16)]. Despite a limited sample size, these data reflect emerging research on sex-differences in the physiological presentation and impact of Covid-19 and parallel large-scale trends in authorship patterns. Ultimately, this work highlights potential biases in the dissemination of clinical information via case reports and underscores the inextricable influences of sex and gender biases within biomedicine.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Sex and Gender Bias in Covid-19 Clinical Case Reports

Salter-Volz

Oyasu

Chen

et al. 2021

Front. Glob. Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, publishing an article in one of these eight journals is undeniably considered a high achievement by the author (Heck et al, 2009). From the field of medicine, we include the so-called "big five" journals, which are considered high impact journals of general medicine (Allotey et al, 2017;Yamazaki et al, 2009). Psychology journals are chosen using the ten psychology journals defined by Smith et al (2000).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acting hot or not? Testing the citing to show-off hypothesis

Nicolaisen

Frandsen

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeCitation analysis as a method for studying scientific communication is frequently criticized for being based on biased citation practices. Questionable motives for the reference selection have been suggested including the claim that authors tend to cite hot papers in order to show-off. In this study, the authors investigate the claim that authors tend to cite the recent literature in order to show-off.Design/methodology/approachFollowing Moed and Garfield (2004), the authors investigate the claim by analyzing the proportion of recent references as a function of the length of the reference lists of citing papers. The authors analyze reference lists of citing papers in the fields of biomedical engineering, economics, medicine, psychology and library and information science between 2010 and 2019. From each of these fields, a number of journals are included in the analysis to represent the field. In total, 42 journals are included in the analyses comprising a selection of almost 65,000 journal articles. The proportion of recent references is calculated using two citation windows. The proportion of recent references as a function of the length of the reference lists is calculated through simple linear regressions to predict the share of recent references based on the number of references.FindingsThe results of the linear regressions indicate that in most cases, there are a statistically significant relationship between the share of recent references and the number of references. This study’s results show that when authors display selective referencing behavior, references to the recent literature tend to be only marginally increased, and some results even display the opposite tendency (marginally overciting the older literature).Originality/valueThis study of the claim that authors tend to cite the recent literature in order to show-off does not confirm the hypothesis.

show abstract

“…Powerful messages about inclusion and exclusion can be conveyed to learners simply by the choice of authors and topics to include (or not include) on a course reading list [57]. Assumptions and biases about ethnic and racial groups can be embedded in case studies [136]. Choices in instructional materials (e.g., the use of videos without subtitles or podcasts without transcripts) can marginalize and disadvantage students with visual or auditory disabilities [137].…”

Section: Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

Translating the learning sciences into practice: A primer for clinical and translational educators

Norman

Lotrecchiano

2021

J. Clin. Trans. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The learning sciences have yielded a wealth of insights about the mechanisms and conditions that promote learning, yet the findings from this body of research often do not make their way into educational practice. This fundamentally translational problem is one we believe that educators from translational fields, with their evidence-based orientation and familiarity with the challenges and importance of translation, are well-positioned to address. Here, we provide a primer on the learning sciences to guide educators in the Clinical and Translational Science Institutes and other organizations that train translational researchers. We (a) describe the unique teaching and learning environment in which this training occurs, and why it necessitates attention to learning research and its appropriate application, (b) explain what the learning sciences are, (c) distill the complex science of learning into core principles, (d) situate recent developments in the field within these principles, and (e) explain, in practical terms, how these principles can inform our teaching.

show abstract

Gender bias in clinical case reports: A cross-sectional study of the “big five” medical journals

Cited by 14 publications

References 15 publications

Sex and Gender Bias in Covid-19 Clinical Case Reports

Sex and Gender Bias in Covid-19 Clinical Case Reports

Acting hot or not? Testing the citing to show-off hypothesis

Translating the learning sciences into practice: A primer for clinical and translational educators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About