Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36074782›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2022

Impact of gender on the formation and outcome of formal mentoring relationships in the life sciences.

Leah P Schwartz, Jean F Liénard, Stephen V David

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Leah P SchwartzOregon Hearing Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.
Jean F LiénardOregon Hearing Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.
Stephen V DavidOregon Hearing Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4135-3104
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite increasing representation in graduate training programs, a disproportionate number of women leave academic research without obtaining an independent position that enables them to train the next generation of academic researchers. To understand factors underlying this trend, we analyzed formal PhD and postdoctoral mentoring relationships in the life sciences during the years 2000 to 2020. Student and mentor gender are both associated with differences in rates of student's continuation to positions that allow formal academic mentorship. Although trainees of women mentors are less likely to take on positions as academic mentors than trainees of men mentors, this effect is reduced substantially after controlling for several measurements of mentor status. Thus, the effect of mentor gender can be explained at least partially by gender disparities in social and financial resources available to mentors. Because trainees and mentors tend to be of the same gender, this association between mentor gender and academic continuation disproportionately impacts women trainees. On average, gender homophily in graduate training is unrelated to mentor status. A notable exception to this trend is the special case of scientists having been granted an outstanding distinction, evidenced by membership in the National Academy of Sciences, being a grantee of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, or having been awarded the Nobel Prize. This group of mentors trains men graduate students at higher rates than their most successful colleagues. These results suggest that, in addition to other factors that limit career choices for women trainees, gender inequities in mentors' access to resources and prestige contribute to women's attrition from independent research positions.

Indexed as

Biological Science DisciplinesMentoringFemaleHumansMaleMentorsResearch PersonnelSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36074782
PMCPMC9455859
OpenAlexW4294990975

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.