Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38708126›Full record

ArticleAMRC open research2022

The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages.

Melina Andreou, Narshil Choi, Jorge Gómez Magenti, Susan Kohlhaas, Rosa Sancho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMRC open research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Authorship and citation trends in dementia research: A path to equitable career development for scientists.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Reframing motherhood in dementia research: A call for action.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Melina AndreouImperial College London, London, SW7 2BX, UK.
Narshil ChoiDrexel University, Philadelphia, 19104, USA.
Jorge Gómez MagentiAlzheimer's Research UK, Cambridge, CB21 6AD, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1444-2005
Susan KohlhaasAlzheimer's Research UK, Cambridge, CB21 6AD, UK.
Rosa SanchoAlzheimer's Research UK, Cambridge, CB21 6AD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Multiple studies have analysed gender disparities in academic research. Here we study the gender composition of the dementia research field at different stages in the career pipeline. Methods: We use various data sources to gain insights about the gender ratio across career stages: conference attendance data as a proxy for the field as a whole; bibliometric data to know who publishes, and who occupies positions of seniority among the listed authors; and Alzheimer's Research UK's (ARUK) internal grant funding data to understand who obtains funding. We also analyse the scoring of grant applications based on the gender of the reviewers. Results: Our results confirm that female researchers leave dementia academic research at higher rates than men, before transitioning into senior positions. In 2020, they comprised over 60% of the field, produced 54% of first authorships, but only accounted for 38% of last authorships. Overall, women received 37% of ARUK's competitive grants, with significant differences between grant schemes awarded for early career researchers (64% female awardees) compared to grant schemes aimed at senior researchers (33% female awardees). Men and women applied for and obtained grants at significantly different rates depending on the career stage at which the grant was aimed.Finally, we also observed that male and female reviewers apply evaluation criteria differently, with men giving better scores than women on average. Conclusions: Our study adds to the evidence that shows that women get published less, receive less funding, and transition into senior academic positions at disproportionally lower rates than men do. We briefly discuss potential reasons why gender disparities arise as researchers progress into senior positions, and offer interventions ARUK can implement in its application and evaluation process to address those disparities.

Indexed as

author listsdementia researchgender disparitiesgrant applicationsresearch funding

Identifiers

PMID38708126
PMCPMC11064979

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.