Cargando…

Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships

OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-quality dermatological research by analysing the representation of female authorships from January 2008 to May 2017. DESIGN: Retrospective, descriptive study. SETTING: 113 189 male and female authorships from 23 373...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bendels, Michael H K, Dietz, Michelle Cathrin, Brüggmann, Dörthe, Oremek, Gerhard Maximilian, Schöffel, Norman, Groneberg, David A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5905741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29654022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020089
_version_ 1783315305259335680
author Bendels, Michael H K
Dietz, Michelle Cathrin
Brüggmann, Dörthe
Oremek, Gerhard Maximilian
Schöffel, Norman
Groneberg, David A
author_facet Bendels, Michael H K
Dietz, Michelle Cathrin
Brüggmann, Dörthe
Oremek, Gerhard Maximilian
Schöffel, Norman
Groneberg, David A
author_sort Bendels, Michael H K
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-quality dermatological research by analysing the representation of female authorships from January 2008 to May 2017. DESIGN: Retrospective, descriptive study. SETTING: 113 189 male and female authorships from 23 373 research articles published in 23 dermatological Q1 journals were analysed with the aid of the Gendermetrics Platform. RESULTS: 43.0% of all authorships and 50.2% of the firstauthorships, 43.7% of the coauthorships and 33.1% of the last authorships are held by women. The corresponding female-to-male ORs are 1.41 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.45) for first authorships, 1.07 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.10) for coauthorships and 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62) for last authorships. The annual growth rates are 1.74% overall and 1.45% for first authorships, 1.53% for coauthorships and 2.97% for last authorships. Women are slightly under-represented at prestigious authorships compared with men (Prestige Index=−0.11). The under-representation remains stable in highly competitive articles attracting the highest citation rates, namely, articles with many authors and articles that were published in highest-impact journals. Multiauthor articles with male key authors are only slightly more frequently cited than those with female key authors. Women publish slightly fewer papers compared with men (47.2% women hold 43.0% of the authorships). At the level of individual journals, there is a high degree of uniformity in gender-specific authorship odds. By contrast, distinct differences at country level were revealed. The prognosis for the next decades forecasts a consecutive harmonisation of authorship odds between the two genders. CONCLUSIONS: In high-quality dermatological research, the integration of female scholars is advanced as compared with other medical disciplines. A gender gap consists mainly in the form of a career dichotomy, with many female early career researchers and few women in academic leadership positions. However, this gender gap has been narrowed in the last decade and will likely be further reduced in the future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5905741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59057412018-04-20 Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships Bendels, Michael H K Dietz, Michelle Cathrin Brüggmann, Dörthe Oremek, Gerhard Maximilian Schöffel, Norman Groneberg, David A BMJ Open Dermatology OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to elucidate the state of gender equality in high-quality dermatological research by analysing the representation of female authorships from January 2008 to May 2017. DESIGN: Retrospective, descriptive study. SETTING: 113 189 male and female authorships from 23 373 research articles published in 23 dermatological Q1 journals were analysed with the aid of the Gendermetrics Platform. RESULTS: 43.0% of all authorships and 50.2% of the firstauthorships, 43.7% of the coauthorships and 33.1% of the last authorships are held by women. The corresponding female-to-male ORs are 1.41 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.45) for first authorships, 1.07 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.10) for coauthorships and 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62) for last authorships. The annual growth rates are 1.74% overall and 1.45% for first authorships, 1.53% for coauthorships and 2.97% for last authorships. Women are slightly under-represented at prestigious authorships compared with men (Prestige Index=−0.11). The under-representation remains stable in highly competitive articles attracting the highest citation rates, namely, articles with many authors and articles that were published in highest-impact journals. Multiauthor articles with male key authors are only slightly more frequently cited than those with female key authors. Women publish slightly fewer papers compared with men (47.2% women hold 43.0% of the authorships). At the level of individual journals, there is a high degree of uniformity in gender-specific authorship odds. By contrast, distinct differences at country level were revealed. The prognosis for the next decades forecasts a consecutive harmonisation of authorship odds between the two genders. CONCLUSIONS: In high-quality dermatological research, the integration of female scholars is advanced as compared with other medical disciplines. A gender gap consists mainly in the form of a career dichotomy, with many female early career researchers and few women in academic leadership positions. However, this gender gap has been narrowed in the last decade and will likely be further reduced in the future. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5905741/ /pubmed/29654022 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020089 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Dermatology
Bendels, Michael H K
Dietz, Michelle Cathrin
Brüggmann, Dörthe
Oremek, Gerhard Maximilian
Schöffel, Norman
Groneberg, David A
Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title_full Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title_fullStr Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title_full_unstemmed Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title_short Gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
title_sort gender disparities in high-quality dermatology research: a descriptive bibliometric study on scientific authorships
topic Dermatology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5905741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29654022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020089
work_keys_str_mv AT bendelsmichaelhk genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships
AT dietzmichellecathrin genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships
AT bruggmanndorthe genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships
AT oremekgerhardmaximilian genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships
AT schoffelnorman genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships
AT gronebergdavida genderdisparitiesinhighqualitydermatologyresearchadescriptivebibliometricstudyonscientificauthorships