Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38919946›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2024

The gap that Matilda will bridge: a look at the Colombian case.

Isabel Cristina Rivera-Lozada, Andrés Mauricio Gómez-Sánchez, Oriana Rivera-Lozada

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Isabel Cristina Rivera-LozadaDepartamento de Economía, Universidad del Cauca, Popayán, Cauca, Colombia.
Andrés Mauricio Gómez-SánchezDepartamento de Economía, Universidad del Cauca, Popayán, Cauca, Colombia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6582-4129
Oriana Rivera-LozadaFacultad de educación, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6546-3570

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To determine gender gaps in Emeritus researchers in Colombia. Methods: Oaxaca-Blinder-Kitakagwa decomposition model, correcting the sample selection bias with the inclusion of Mills' inverse ratio (Heckman's Lambda) through an ordered Results: The results show that the gender gap between female and male researchers is 5.8%. To achieve Emeritus status, one must be over 65 years old, and the possibility of achieving Emeritus status is 5.1% higher for female researchers than for their male counterparts. These differences can be explained by the time constraints that female researchers face in being productive, as they spend more time than male researchers on caregiving responsibilities, either due to motherhood or the care of other dependent family members. Conclusions: The results obtained allow us to affirm that there is a gender gap in scientific research in Colombia in the Emeritus research category in the calls for proposals for the period 2015-2021. Moreover, the existing gap cannot be explained by factors associated with attributes of education and academic productivity that are part of the regulatory requirements, insofar as not being explained by them, it evidences the existence of discrimination against women researchers to access the highest research category.

Indexed as

Research PersonnelAdultAgedColombiaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSex FactorsdiscriminationGender gapscientific researchsegregationSTEM.

Identifiers

PMID38919946
PMCPMC11196936

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.