ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
Intersectional inequalities in science.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 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
82 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reaching gender parity and improving internationalisation after five decades of FSBI symposia, but subtle career-stage effects on timekeeping remain.Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
- Targeted termination of scientific grants and minoritised researcher status in a national survey: a cross sectional analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Health Implications of Colorism: A Narrative Review of the Literature.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Review
- National-, institutional-, and individual-level determinants of pharmacology and pharmacy research excellence: an analysis of stanford-elsevier lists of the top 2% scholars (2017-2023).Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Collaborative relationships, disciplinary and global culture, social identity and scientific status shape how scholars cite prior work.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Representation in science and trust in scientists in the USA.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- Gender differences in submission behavior exacerbate publication disparities in elite journals.eLife · 2026Article
- Attribution of credit in acknowledgements: The case of systematic reviews in medicine.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Intersectional inequalities in social ties.Science advances · 2025Article
- Designing clinical practice guidelines for equitable, inclusive, and contextualised care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Breaking barriers: ten essential steps to achieve gender equality in academia through scientific societies.npj biodiversity · 2025Review
- Radical Healing Approaches For Black Maternal Health: A Critical Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Review
- Ten simple rules for success as a trainee-led outreach organization in computational biology education.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Twenty years of infectious disease dynamics research: gender and race imbalances in publication and citation practices.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- An Efficient Deep Learning Framework for Revealing the Evolution of Characterization Methods in Nanoscience.Nano-micro letters · 2025Article
- Gender and racial diversity socialization in science.Nature computational science · 2025Article
- Enhancing rigor and justice in genetic counseling research with reflexivity and positionality.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- The differential impacts of team diversity as variability versus atypicality on team effectiveness.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Research for all: building a diverse researcher community for the All of Us Research Program.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The US scientific workforce is primarily composed of White men. Studies have demonstrated the systemic barriers preventing women and other minoritized populations from gaining entry to science; few, however, have taken an intersectional perspective and examined the consequences of these inequalities on scientific knowledge. We provide a large-scale bibliometric analysis of the relationship between intersectional identities, topics, and scientific impact. We find homophily between identities and topic, suggesting a relationship between diversity in the scientific workforce and expansion of the knowledge base. However, topic selection comes at a cost to minoritized individuals for whom we observe both between- and within-topic citation disadvantages. To enhance the robustness of science, research organizations should provide adequate resources to historically underfunded research areas while simultaneously providing access for minoritized individuals into high-prestige networks and topics.
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.