ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2025
Persistent Gender Disparity in Authorship of Arthroscopic Surgery Research.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance of name-to-gender inference: comparison between Gender API, NamSor, and genderize.io in a multicultural global dataset.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To examine how the gender of the first and last authors of annual meeting abstracts and journal articles from a related source have changed between 2012 and 2022. Methods: All abstracts and original research articles published from 2012 to 2022 were extracted from the websites of The Arthroscopy Association of North America and Results: Of 850 abstracts, 845 (99.4%) had an identifiable first-author gender and 843 (99.2%) had an identifiable last-author gender. The proportion of female first authors increased from 9.2% in 2012 to 15.2% in 2022, whereas the proportion of female last authors decreased from 13.5% in 2012 to 12.3% in 2022. Of 4,811 articles, 4,744 (98.6%) had an identifiable first author gender and 4,767 (99.1%) had an identifiable last author gender. The proportion of female first authors increased from 10.4% in 2012 to 16.8% in 2022, whereas the proportion of female last authors decreased from 19.0% in 2012 to 9.1% in 2022. For both abstracts and articles, the gender of the last author was not significantly associated with the presence of a female first author. Conclusions: Between 2021 and 2022, there was a significant increase in the proportion of female first authors of both abstracts and articles examined in this study. However, a similar increase was not seen among last authors. Clinical Relevance: It is important to examine gender representation among authors who publish arthroscopic research to understand how a greater balance may be achieved.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.