Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36530543›Full record

ArticleHumanities & social sciences communications2022

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists' productivity in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and medicine fields.

Seulkee Heo, Alisha Yee Chan, Pedro Diaz Peralta, Lan Jin, Claudia Ribeiro Pereira Nunes, Michelle L Bell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Humanities & social sciences communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. A bench-top Dark-Root device built with LEGOFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  20. Analysis of the retention of women in higher education STEM programs.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2023
    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

6 authors.

Seulkee HeoSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0786-5002
Alisha Yee ChanSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.
Pedro Diaz PeraltaSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.
Lan JinSchool of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.
Claudia Ribeiro Pereira NunesSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.
Michelle L BellSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3965-1359

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While studies suggested adverse impacts of COVID-19 on scientific outputs and work routines for scientists, more evidence is required to understand detailed obstacles challenging scientists' work and productivity during the pandemic, including how different people are affected (e.g., by gender). This online survey-based thematic analysis investigated how the pandemic affected scientists' perception of scientific and academic productivity in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and medicine fields. The analysis examined if inequitable changes in duties and responsibilities for caregiving for children, family, and/or households exist between scientists who are mothers compared to scientists who are fathers or non-parents. The survey collected data from 2548 survey responses in six languages across 132 countries. Results indicate that many scientists suffered from delays and restrictions on research activities and administrations due to the lockdown of institutions, as well as increased workloads from adapting to online teaching environment. Caregiving responsibility for children and family increased, which compromised time for academic efforts, especially due to the temporary shutdown of social supports. Higher percentages of female parent participants than male parent participants expressed such increased burdens indicating unequal divisions of caregiving between women and men. A range of physical and mental health issues was identified mainly due to overworking and isolation. Despite numerous obstacles, some participants reported advantages during the pandemic including the efficiency of online teaching, increased funding for COVID-related research, application of alternative research methodologies, and fluidity of the workday from not commuting. Findings imply the need for rapid institutional support to aid various academic activities and diminish gender inequity in career development among academicians, highlighting how crisis can exacerbate existing inequalities.

Indexed as

EducationEnvironmental studies

Identifiers

PMID36530543
PMCPMC9734604

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.