Introduction: Despite increasing female representation in medical fields, women remain underrepresented in high-impact authorship positions. This study examines gender disparities in authorship of randomized controlled trials in general surgery journals over the past 20 y. Methods: Utilizing PubMed and the Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023), we identified 8810 randomized controlled trials from 117 surgery journals, filtering down to 5694 studies for final analysis. Gender identification was performed using Genderize.io. Results: Results indicate that women accounted for 26.4% of first authorships and 18.7% of last authorships. Logistic regression revealed that a male last author significantly increases the likelihood of a male first author (odds ratio 2.68; 95% confidence interval 2.18-3.32). Over time, there is a positive trend in female authorship, with high correlation coefficients for both first (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.916, P < 0.005) and last (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.878, P < 0.005) authors. Interestingly, journal quartiles did not significantly influence the gender of first authors. Conclusions: These findings suggest persistent gender inequity in surgical research authorship, influenced by mentorship dynamics. The study underscores the need for strategies to enhance female representation in academic leadership to foster a more equitable scholarly environment. Limitations include reliance on Genderize.io for gender determination and the focus on general surgery journals, which may omit relevant studies from other domains. Overall, this research highlights incremental progress toward gender equality in surgical academia, advocating for continued efforts to close the gender gap.

Gender Disparity in Surgical Research: An Analysis of Authorship in Randomized Controlled Trials

De Cassai, Alessandro
;
Spolverato, Gaya
2024

Abstract

Introduction: Despite increasing female representation in medical fields, women remain underrepresented in high-impact authorship positions. This study examines gender disparities in authorship of randomized controlled trials in general surgery journals over the past 20 y. Methods: Utilizing PubMed and the Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023), we identified 8810 randomized controlled trials from 117 surgery journals, filtering down to 5694 studies for final analysis. Gender identification was performed using Genderize.io. Results: Results indicate that women accounted for 26.4% of first authorships and 18.7% of last authorships. Logistic regression revealed that a male last author significantly increases the likelihood of a male first author (odds ratio 2.68; 95% confidence interval 2.18-3.32). Over time, there is a positive trend in female authorship, with high correlation coefficients for both first (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.916, P < 0.005) and last (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.878, P < 0.005) authors. Interestingly, journal quartiles did not significantly influence the gender of first authors. Conclusions: These findings suggest persistent gender inequity in surgical research authorship, influenced by mentorship dynamics. The study underscores the need for strategies to enhance female representation in academic leadership to foster a more equitable scholarly environment. Limitations include reliance on Genderize.io for gender determination and the focus on general surgery journals, which may omit relevant studies from other domains. Overall, this research highlights incremental progress toward gender equality in surgical academia, advocating for continued efforts to close the gender gap.
2024
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0022480424006863.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Published (Publisher's Version of Record)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 383.22 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
383.22 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3542854
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact