ArticlePloS one2020
Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gender gaps in research: a systematic review.F1000Research · 2023Pooled it
- A scientometric update of the evolution of national scientific production in dental educators in Peru according to gender disparity.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Citation Ethics: An Exploratory Survey of Norms and Behaviors.Journal of academic ethics · 2025Article
- Article
- Editorial: Women in developmental psychopathology and mental health.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- The gap that Matilda will bridge: a look at the Colombian case.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Little transparency and equity in scientific awards for early- and mid-career researchers in ecology and evolution.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Article
- Harnessing Biomaterials for Immunomodulatory-Driven Tissue Engineering.Regenerative engineering and translational medicine · 2023Review
- Factors that affect scientific publication in Africa-A gender perspective.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2023Article
- Gender differences in dentistry and oral sciences research productivity by researchers in Nigeria.Frontiers in oral health · 2023Article
- Gender imbalances in the editorial activities of a selective journal run by academic editors.PloS one · 2023Article
- Gender parity and homophily in the Drug and Alcohol Dependence editorial process.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2022Article
- Article
- Exploring gender differences in Physiotherapy research in Italy: a cross-sectional analysis.Archives of physiotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study builds upon the literature documenting gender disparities in science by investigating research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in three countries. This analysis departs from both the general comparison of researchers across organizational settings and academic appointments on one hand, and the definition of "elite" by the research outcome variables on the other, which are common in previous studies. Instead, this paper's approach considers the stratification of scientific careers by carefully constructing matched samples of men and women holding research chairs in Canada, the United States and South Africa, along with a control group of departmental peers. The analysis is based on a unique, hand-curated dataset including 943 researchers, which allows for a systematic comparison of successful scientists vetted through similar selection mechanisms. Our results show that even among elite scientists a pattern of stratified productivity and recognition by gender remains, with more prominent gaps in recognition. Our results point to the need for gender equity initiatives in science policy to critically examine assessment criteria and evaluation mechanisms to emphasize multiple expressions of research excellence.
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.