Gender Differences in Article Citations by Authors from American Institutions in Major Radiology Journals

Huang, Mingqian; Naser-Tavakolian, Kiyon; Clifton, Michael; Franceschi, Ana M.; Kim, Derek; Zhang, Jill Z; Schweitzer, Mark E.

doi:10.7759/cureus.5313

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in an analysis from 2011 to 2015 of the medium- to high-ranked journals Radiology , Academic Radiology , and AJR, Campbell et al [ 7 ] attributed 30% of FA and 25% of SA to women. A study of the four medium- to high-ranking journals Radiology , EJR, Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography , and AJR described a share of 31.5% FA and 22.1% SA in 2014 [ 10 ]. For European Radiology , 35.0% FA and 18.0% SA were described for 2016 [ 9 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both, the demonstrated general publication gap and the reduced proportions of female senior authors in high-ranked journals are likely to have consequences on female careers. Less authorships in high-ranked journals contribute to lower citation rates of female authors [ 10 ] and thus a lower h-index and academic progress. This relation is supported by a study, which showed that after multivariable adjustment of publication counts and NIH funding rates, full professorship among male and female radiologists was not significantly different [ 11 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latest analyses however ended in 2016 and focused on high-ranking radiological journals such as European Radiology (Eur Radiol), Radiology, and the American Journal of Radiology (AJR) [7][8][9][10]. The aim of this study is to address this gap and to generate a comparison of the publication numbers of female authors from the last 10 years, between 2007/2008 and 2017/2018, in ten representative radiological journals of varying impact factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the feminization of the workforce in medicine, women do not have the same career perspectives or pay as men (1)(2)(3)(4). In the field of medical imaging, the 'pipeline' to the top positions has been described as leaky for female talent, and leadership positions are predominantly held by men (5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female Authors in Nuclear Medicine Journals: A Survey from 2014 to 2020

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the feminization of the medical workforce, women do not have the same career perspectives as men. In nuclear medicine, little information is available on the gender gap regarding prominent author positions of scientific articles. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate recent trends in the gender distribution of first and last authorship of articles published in nuclear medicine journals. MethodsWe conducted a bibliometric analysis of first and last author gender of articles published from 2014 to 2020 in 15 nuclear medicine journals. Manuscript title, article type, journal impact factor, date of publication, first and last name and country of provenance of first and last authors were noted. The Gender-API software was used to determine author gender. All statistics were descriptive. ResultsWomen represented 32.8% of first authors and 19.6% of last ones. Female authorship increased from 28.2% (428 of 1518 articles) in 2014 to 35.5% (735 of 2069 articles, relative increase 72%) in 2020 (p<0.001) for first authors and from 15.6% (237 of 1518 articles) in 2014 to 20.5% (424 of 2069 articles, relative increase 79%) in 2020 (p<0.001) for last ones. Parity was forecasted in 2035 for first authors and in 2052 for last ones. Female authorship increased in Europe for first (p=0.014) and last authors (p<0.001), in highranking journals for first (p=0.004) and last authors (p<0.001) and in other journal ranks for last authors (p=0.01). Female first and last authorship rose for original articles (p=0.02 and p=0.01 respectively) and case reports (p<0.001 and p=0.002 respectively). Regarding collaborations, the proportion of articles produced by male first and last authors decreased from 62.2% in 2014 to 52.9% in 2020 in favor of female first and last authors (OR=1.07, p<0.001), male first and female last authors (OR =1.05, p<0.001) and female first and male last authors (OR=1.03, p<0.001). 4 ConclusionFemale first and last authorship in nuclear medicine journals increased substantially from 2014 to 2020, in particular in high-ranking journals, in Europe and for original articles and case reports. Male/male collaborations decreased by 10% in favor of all other collaborations. Parity can be foreseen in a few decades.

show abstract

“…Beyond the gender imbalance in the number of women in senior positions and amongst tenure-track faculty members, some studies have also reported a citation advantage for male-last authored papers in biomedical and life sciences fields [ 7 – 9 ]. However, some others did not find notable differences between male and female-last authored papers or between female and male authors in terms of the number received citations [ 10 , 11 ]. Typically, in biomedicine, the author listed first has less experience and does most of the research work, while the author listed last has more experience and provides a supervisory role [ 12 , 13 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

Dehdarirad

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, it was investigated whether early tweets counts could differentially benefit female and male (first, last) authors in terms of the later citation counts received. The data for this study comprised 47,961 articles in the research area of Life Sciences & Biomedicine from 2014–2016, retrieved from Web of Science’s Medline . For each article, the number of received citations per year was downloaded from WOS, while the number of received tweets per year was obtained from PlumX. Using the hurdle regression model, I compared the number of received citations by female and male (first, last) authored papers and then I investigated whether early tweet counts could predict the later citation counts received by female and male (first, last) authored papers. In the regression models, I controlled for several important factors that were investigated in previous research in relation to citation counts, gender or Altmetrics. These included journal impact (SNIP), number of authors, open access, research funding, topic of an article, international collaboration, lay summary, F1000 Score and mega journal. The findings showed that the percentage of papers with male authors in first or last authorship positions was higher than that for female authors. However, female first and last-authored papers had a small but significant citation advantage of 4.7% and 5.5% compared to male-authored papers. The findings also showed that irrespective of whether the factors were included in regression models or not, early tweet counts had a weak positive and significant association with the later citations counts (3.3%) and the probability of a paper being cited (21.1%). Regarding gender, the findings showed that when all variables were controlled, female (first, last) authored papers had a small citation advantage of 3.7% and 4.2% in comparison to the male authored papers for the same number of tweets.

show abstract

Gender Differences in Article Citations by Authors from American Institutions in Major Radiology Journals

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

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

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

Female Authors in Nuclear Medicine Journals: A Survey from 2014 to 2020

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About