Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29467058›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2018

Trends in female authorship in research papers on eating disorders: 20-year bibliometric study.

Mattias Strand, Cynthia M Bulik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Not niche: eating disorders as an example in the dangers of overspecialisation.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. BJPsych open · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mattias StrandStockholm Centre for Eating Disorders,Stockholm,Sweden, andDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience,Karolinska Institutet,Stockholm,Sweden.
Cynthia M BulikDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics,Karolinska Institutet,Stockholm,Sweden, andDepartment of Psychiatry and Department of Nutrition,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,Chapel Hill,North Carolina,USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a clear gender gap in scientific authorship. Although the proportions of female authors in medicine and psychiatry have increased over the past decades, women are still underrepresented. Aims To analyse authorship gender trends in eating disorder research.

methodFirst and last author gender in research articles on eating disorders during the period 1997-2016 were assessed in eating disorder specialty journals, high-impact psychiatry journals and high-impact clinical psychology journals.

resultsThe total number of papers on eating disorders increased substantially over the observation period, although a decrease was observed in high-impact psychiatry journals. Female authorship increased in both specialty journals and high-impact psychiatry journals. Authors were significantly less likely to be female in high-impact psychiatry and clinical psychology journals than in speciality journals.

conclusionsEating disorder research has been increasingly allocated to specialty journals over the past 20 years. A consistent gender gap between specialty and high-impact journals exists. Declaration of interest C.M.B is a grant recipient from Shire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and has participated as a member of their scientific advisory board. These positions are unrelated to the content of this article.

Identifiers

PMID29467058
PMCPMC6020273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.