ArticleAtencion primaria2021
[Bibliometric analysis of female authorship in original articles in the journal ATENCIÓN PRIMARIA].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Is Empowerment of Female Radiologists Still Needed? Findings of a Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Gender equity in the scientific nursing journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports: A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the percentage of female authors in original articles published during 2periods, in the journal of Atención Primaria (Primary Care), and to examine the differences between the categories of authorship (first, last author, and co-author) between both periods.
designCross-sectional study.
settingFeminine scientific production published during the periods 2007-2008 and 2017-2018.
participantsThe study was focused on original articles. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The following variables were collected in an ad hoc form: gender based on the name of the author, total number of women and men appearing as authors, and order of authorship. Absolute and relative authorship frequencies were calculated, and the χ
resultsA total of 108 articles were analysed in 2007-2008, and 100 in 2017-2018. No statistically significant differences were observed between the mean numbers of women authors within and between periods. In 2007-2008 a total of 548 female authors were identified and 540 in 2017-2018, the percentage of female authors was 48.7% and 54.4%, respectively. Only an increase in the percentage of first authors was observed between periods.
conclusionsPractically one out of every 2authors of original articles published in the journal Atención Primaria was female. There was also a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors between the 2periods. Nevertheless, and despite the greater number of health workers, the number of latest female authors remain unchanged, which points to the persistence of female under-representation.
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.