Women Authorship in Cardiovascular Science: A Call to Track and Report to Achieve Equity

Cushman, Mary

doi:10.1161/jaha.122.025456

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, publications with female first and last authors attracted fewer citations than those with males in the same roles [15]. This slow participation of women in the scientific process has been further exemplified by the lower gender diversity on journal editorial boards [16][17][18][19][20][21] and scientific committees [22,23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female Dynamics in Authorship of Scientific Publications in the Public Library of Science: A 10-year Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research

Giannos

Triantafyllidis

Paraskevaidi

et al. 2023

EJIHPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women are generally underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). As scientific production reflects scholarly impact and participation in the scientific process, the number of journal publications forms a pertinent measure of academic productivity. This study examined the prevalence and evolution of female representation in prominent author positions across multidisciplinary biomedical research. Publications from seven exemplar cross-specialty journals of the Public Library of Science (PLoS) between January 2010 and December 2020 were extracted from Web of Science. Using Genderize.io, the gender of authors from their first names was estimated using a 75% threshold. The association between female prevalence in first and last authorship and journal was evaluated using a binary logistic regression, and odds ratios were estimated against a 50:50 reference on gender. In 266,739 publications, 43.3% of first authors and 26.7% of last authors were females. Across the ten-year period, female first-authorship increased by 19.6% and last-authorship by 3.2%. Among all journals, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases had the greatest total proportion of female first authors (45.7%) and PLoS Medicine of female last authors (32%), while PLoS Computational Biology had the lowest proportion in these categories (23.7% and 17.2%). First authors were less likely to be females in all PLoS journals (p < 0.05) except for PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases (odds ratio: 0.84, 95% confidence interval: 0.71–1.00), where the odds of female authorship were not significantly different (p = 0.054). Last authors were not more likely to be females in all PLoS journals (p < 0.001). Overall, women still appear underrepresented as first authors in biomedical publications and their representation as last authors has severely lagged. Efforts towards gender equality in scholarly authorship will contribute to the representation of women in biomedical research and ensure that their potential is not lost.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female Dynamics in Authorship of Scientific Publications in the Public Library of Science: A 10-year Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research

Giannos

Triantafyllidis

Paraskevaidi

et al. 2023

EJIHPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results recapitulate recent study findings demonstrating women are more likely to win awards not named after men. 20 Nevertheless, given recent diversity, equity, and inclusion advocacy efforts, 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 we are encouraged by our findings that, although still underrepresented, the proportion of women recognition award recipients increased significantly over the last decade compared with the previous 4 decades.…”

mentioning

confidence: 82%

“…15 These data suggest that low numbers of awardees within hemostasis and thrombosis likely stand in contrast to the increasing number of women within the academic pipeline, as women have comprised only 22% of recognition award recipients in the last decade, despite the increasing prominence of diversity, equity, and inclusion research publications and initiatives to promote women in hemostasis and thrombosis. 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender equity analysis of nontrainee hemostasis and thrombosis recognition award recipients

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The editorial boards were 29% women in 2020-2021 and 30% women in 2021-2022 [ 15 ]. Although these percentages are lower than the percentage of female members of this organization 34% [ 16 ], trends are going in the right direction.…”

Section: What Is Happening In the Literature?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Equity in scientific publishing: 2022 results from Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Pendlebury¹,

Cushman²

2023

Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women Authorship in Cardiovascular Science: A Call to Track and Report to Achieve Equity

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Female Dynamics in Authorship of Scientific Publications in the Public Library of Science: A 10-year Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research

Female Dynamics in Authorship of Scientific Publications in the Public Library of Science: A 10-year Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research

Gender equity analysis of nontrainee hemostasis and thrombosis recognition award recipients

Equity in scientific publishing: 2022 results from Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About