Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40047859›Full record

ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025

The Gender Award Gap in German medical societies 2000-2023: the Fritz-Külz-Award as an example.

Thorsten Halling, Viola Mambrey, Jessica Marie Steinert, Roland Seifert, Annegret Dreher, Chantal Marazia, Adrian Loerbroks, Nils Hansson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Should we consider gender aspects in pharmacology teaching? No-we must!Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Thorsten HallingDepartment for the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Center for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Viola MambreyInstitute of Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, Center for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Jessica Marie SteinertDepartment of Pharmacology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Roland SeifertDepartment of Pharmacology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Annegret DreherInstitute of Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, Center for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Chantal MaraziaDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Adrian LoerbroksInstitute of Occupational, Social, and Environmental Medicine, Center for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Nils HanssonDepartment for the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Center for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. nils.hansson@hhu.de.

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01FP21089
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science prizes contribute to the visibility of researchers within and outside the medical community. Our article contains a descriptive analysis of the prize development in German medical societies since the turn of the millennium, focussing on the development of gender differences and discussing the findings with regard to necessary structural changes and the general significance of prizes in medicine. The study is based on data from all documented prizes and honours awarded by the 183 German medical societies currently organised in the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften) in the period 2000-2023, including the Fritz-Külz-Award in pharmacology. For the first time, our study enables a differentiated overall view of the diverse prize culture in German medical societies, with 1213 awards (including 201 scholarships). The results show that the gender award gap found in international studies, particularly for prestigious awards, has continuously narrowed in the awarding practice of German medical societies since 2000. However, a gender-specific imbalance is still recognisable, particularly in the case of prestigious honorary prizes and more highly endowed research prizes. Differences between the specialist societies, depending on the speciality, the respective proportion of female specialists and the proportion of female scientists among the members must be investigated in further detailed studies. The specialist societies are therefore called upon to make their nomination and application practices even more transparent in order to better recognise potential disadvantages.

Indexed as

Awards and PrizesSocieties, MedicalFemaleGermanyHumansMaleCreditGender equityPharmacologyPrestigePrizesRecognition

Identifiers

PMID40047859
PMCPMC12350518

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.