Articlegreen2020

Gender Differences in Authorship of Critical Care Literature

Kelly C. Vranas · David Ouyang · Amber Laurie Lin · Christopher G. Slatore · Donald Richard Sullivan · Meeta Prasad Kerlin +9 more

82 citations0/0 files storedAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Diversity and Career in Medicine scientometrics and bibliometrics research Sex and Gender in Healthcare

Abstract

Abstract Rationale Gender gaps exist in academic leadership positions in critical care. Peer-reviewed publications are crucial to career advancement, and yet little is known regarding gender differences in authorship of critical care research. Objectives To evaluate gender differences in authorship of critical care literature. Methods We used a validated database of author gender to analyze authorship of critical care articles indexed in PubMed between 2008 and 2018 in 40 frequently cited journals. High-impact journals were defined as those in the top 5% of all journals. We used mixed-effects logistic regression to evaluate the association of senior author gender with first and middle author gender, as well as association of first author gender with journal impact factor. Measurements and Main Results Among 18,483 studies, 30.8% had female first authors, and 19.5% had female senior authors. Female authorship rose slightly over the last decade (average annual increases of 0.44% [P < 0.01] and 0.51% [P < 0.01] for female first and senior authors, respectively). When the senior author was female, the odds of female coauthorship rose substantially (first author adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71–2.17; middle author aOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.29–1.69). Female first authors had higher odds than men of publishing in lower-impact journals (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.16–1.45). Conclusions Women comprise less than one-third of first authors and one-fourth of senior authors of critical care research, with minimal increase over the past decade. When the senior author was female, the odds of female coauthorship rose substantially. However, female first authors tend to publish in lower-impact journals. These findings may help explain the underrepresentation of women in critical care academic leadership positions and identify targets for improvement.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 82 citations exist upstream.

References

2006Mentoring in Academic Medicine 2013Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science 2015Sex Differences in Academic Rank in US Medical Schools in 2014 2007Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors 2008Indexed Pain Journals 2016Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014)2011Women Underrepresented on Editorial Boards of 60 Major Medical Journals 2016Why do women choose or reject careers in academic medicine? A narrative review of empirical evidence

Cited by

2022The voices of medical education scholarship: Describing the published landscape 2021Addressing gender imbalance in intensive care 2021Gender disparity in critical care publications: a novel Female First Author Index 2023Gender and racial differences in first and senior authorship of high-impact critical care randomized controlled trial studies from 2000 to 2022 2020First and last authorship by gender in emergency medicine publications- a comparison of 2008 vs. 2018

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.