ArticleBMJ open2019
Comparison of the contributions of female and male authors to medical research in 2000 and 2015: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender and geographical bias in the editorial decision-making process of biomedical journals: a case-control study.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- The inclusion of the gender perspective in oncology research with Spanish participation.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors Moderate Associations between Work Stress and Exhaustion: Testing the Job Demands-Resources Model in Academic Staff at an Austrian Medical University.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Female authorship of covid-19 research in manuscripts submitted to 11 biomedical journals: cross sectional study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Comparing the gender diversity and affiliation trends of the authors for two orthopaedics journals from the Arab world.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2021Article
- What Are the Rates and Trends of Women Authors in Three High-impact Orthopaedic Journals from 2006-2017?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Article
- Healthcare Professionals' Knowledge of Pharmacogenetics and Attitudes Towards Antimicrobial Utilization in Zambia: Implications for a Precision Medicine Approach to Reducing Antimicrobial Resistance.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
- Justice for George Floyd and a reckoning for global mental health.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe proportion of women engaged in clinical research has increased over time. However, it is unclear if women and men contribute to the same extent during the conduct of research and, if so, if they are equally rewarded by a strategic first or last author position. We aim to describe the prevalence of women authors of original articles published 15 years apart and to compare the research contributions and author positions according to gender.
designRepeated cross-sectional study.
settingPublished original articles.
participants1910 authors of 223 original articles published in the PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: Self-reported contributions to 10 aspects of the article (primary) and author position on the byline.
resultsThe proportion of women authors increased from 32% (n=243) to 41% (n=469) between 2000 and 2015 (p<0.0001). In 2000, women authors were less frequently involved than men in the conception and design (134 (55%) vs 323 (61%); p=0.0256), critical revision (171 (70%) vs 426 (81%); p=0.0009), final approval (196 (81%) vs 453 (86%); p=0.0381) and obtaining of funding (39 (16%) vs 114 (22%); p=0.0245). Women were more frequently involved than men in administration and logistics (85 (35%) vs 137 (26%); p=0.0188) and data collection (121 (50%) vs 242 (46%); p=0.0532), but they were similarly involved in the analysis and interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, provision of materials/patients and statistical expertise. Women were less often last authors than men (22 (9%) vs 82 (16%); p=0.0102). These gender differences persisted in 2015.
conclusionsThe representation of women among authors of medical articles increased notably between 2000 and 2015, but still remained below 50%. Women's roles differed from those of men with no change over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.