Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34146162›Full record

ReviewPediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2021

The red lipstick mentor.

Djalila Mekahli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Djalila MekahliDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. djalila.mekahli@uzleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0954-6088

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prof. Lesley Rees belongs to the women who changed science and has inspired so many young researchers, including myself. These inspiring women deserve more credit and recognition than they get because they serve as a role model for us. Indeed, despite advances towards women empowerment, progress has been slow, and discrepancy persists around the world. Unfortunately, science is not immune to such inequalities, and the voices of female leaders are important in cracking this gender filter. Women represent only a third of researchers globally and often face gender-based discrimination and lack equal opportunities. In this letter, I would like to highlight three astonishing researchers in an effort to underscore the importance of existing women mentorship, while transmitting the pride of the red lipstick rather than the victimization of the red cheeks.

Indexed as

MentorsSexismFemaleHumansGender equalityMentorResearchRole modelScienceWomen

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.