Gender Disparities in Citations and Altmetric Attention Score in Oncology

Rebecca A. Campbell · Emma K. Helstrom · Lauren Chew · Renu S. Eapen · Elizabeth R. Plimack · Andres F. Correa +13 more

5 citations0/0 files storedJCO Oncology Practice

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

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

Abstract

PURPOSE: Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) is a measure of the quantity of attention that a scholarly work receives, and evidence about gender gaps in AAS in oncology is lacking. Our objective was to analyze potential disparities in the AAS within oncology by comparing research publications authored by women first and last authors with those authored by men. Secondarily, we aimed to quantify the extent of over-/undercitation by gender. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The initial data set was compiled from the Altmetric database through Application Programming Interface (API) using oncology-related search terms. Author gender categories were assigned on the basis of the Gender Guesser API. For example, those with first and last authors labeled woman were categorized as woman first author/woman last author (WW). Over-/undercitation was calculated using observed citations and expected citations. Analyses were completed both for the oncology literature as a whole and for prominent subspecialty peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: < .01 for both). Although the proportion of WW authors in oncology publications increased over time, the man first author/man last author combination was overcited (mean citation percentage difference [MCD] = +16.2%), whereas WW was undercited (MCD = -7.7%). There was variation in both proportion of WW papers and over-/undercitation among oncologic subspecialties. CONCLUSION: Significant gender disparities in citation rates and AAS exist across various fields within oncology. This highlights a systemic issue where woman-authored research is undercited and receives less attention compared with man-authored work, with the potential to affect career advancement, funding opportunities, and academic recognition.

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 — 5 citations exist upstream.

References

2006The “Gender Gap” in Authorship of Academic Medical Literature — A 35-Year Perspective 2016Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014)2018Gender disparities in high-quality research revealed by Nature Index journals 2021Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions 2021Gender Disparity in Citations in High-Impact Journal Articles 2020Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results From the TSSMN Prospective Randomized Trial 2019Gender differences in how scientists present the importance of their research: observational study 2021Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

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.