Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32538780›Full record

ArticleeLife2020

COVID-19 medical papers have fewer women first authors than expected.

Jens Peter Andersen, Mathias Wullum Nielsen, Nicole L Simone, Resa E Lewiss, Reshma Jagsi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 151 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
151citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

151 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Gender-specific Differences in Radiation Oncology Training during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Subanalysis.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Building Up a Biomedical Research Workforce Trial.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. COVID-19 and stroke in women: impact on clinical, psychosocial and research aspects.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

91 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jens Peter AndersenDanish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2444-6210
Mathias Wullum NielsenDepartment of Sociology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8759-7150
Nicole L SimoneDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7662-7470
Resa E LewissDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9512-4342
Reshma JagsiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6562-1228

Funding

Diet Modification to Augment Radiation for Breast Cancer Brain MetastasesR01CA227479 · NCI · THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY · PI SIMONE, NICOLE L · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA227479
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in school closures and distancing requirements that have disrupted both work and family life for many. Concerns exist that these disruptions caused by the pandemic may not have influenced men and women researchers equally. Many medical journals have published papers on the pandemic, which were generated by researchers facing the challenges of these disruptions. Here we report the results of an analysis that compared the gender distribution of authors on 1893 medical papers related to the pandemic with that on papers published in the same journals in 2019, for papers with first authors and last authors from the United States. Using mixed-effects regression models, we estimated that the proportion of COVID-19 papers with a woman first author was 19% lower than that for papers published in the same journals in 2019, while our comparisons for last authors and overall proportion of women authors per paper were inconclusive. A closer examination suggested that women's representation as first authors of COVID-19 research was particularly low for papers published in March and April 2020. Our findings are consistent with the idea that the research productivity of women, especially early-career women, has been affected more than the research productivity of men.

Indexed as

AuthorshipBibliometricsCoronavirus InfectionsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralWomenCOVID-19EfficiencyFemaleHumansMedicinePeriodicals as TopicPhysicians, WomenResearch PersonnelSex FactorsSocial IsolationbiasbibliometricsCOVID-19genderhumanhuman biologymedicinemeta-researchpublishing

Identifiers

PMID32538780
PMCPMC7304994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.