ArticlePloS one2022
Disparate participation by gender of conference attendants in scientific discussions.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic Imbalance? Gender Disparities in Gastroenterology Across a Decade of the Visceral Medicine Congress in Germany.Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie · 2026Article
- Through the scope, not the ceiling: Gender distribution among endoscopy sessions at the German Visceral Medicine Congress.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Observational
- [Representation of women in senior positions in emergency medicine].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Review
- Towards equality: gender representation at the Royal College of Radiologists' Annual Scientific Meeting 2014-2021.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
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
Abstract
One important metric of a radiologist's visibility and influence is their ability to participate in discussion within their community. The goal of our study was to compare the participation level of men and women in scientific discussions at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA). Eleven volunteers collected participation data by gender in 59 sessions (286 presentations) at the 2018 RSNA meeting. Data was analyzed using a combination of Chi-squared, paired Wilcoxon signed-rank and T-test. Of all RSNA professional attendees at the RSNA, 68% were men and 32% were women. Of the 2869 presentations listed in the program, 65% were presented by men and 35% were presented by women. Of the 286 presentations in our sample, 177 (61.8%) were presented by men and 109 (38.1%) were presented by women. Of these 286 presentations, 81 (63%) were moderated by men and 47 (37%) were moderated by women. From the audience, 190 male attendees participated in 134 question-and-answer (Q&A) sessions following presentations and 58 female attendees participated in 52 Q&A sessions (P<0.001). Female attendees who did participate in Q&A sessions talked for a significantly shorter period of time (mean 7.14 ± 17.7 seconds, median 0) compared to male attendees (28.7 ± 29.6 seconds, median 16; P<0.001). Overall, our findings demonstrate that women participated less than men in the Q&A sessions at RSNA 2018, and talked for a shorter period of time. The fact that women were outnumbered among their male peers may explain the difference in behavior by gender.
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.