ArticlePloS one2025
Unpacking gender discrepancies in academic promotion across STEM fields in Mexico.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Gender inequality in academic promotion trajectories in Japan.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gender inequality in the sciences remains a persistent issue. Women are often unable to participate in the scientific process as easily as men. When they do, this is largely constricted to opportunities at the lower rather than higher ranks of academia. This gap not only sets back female scientists but also scientific and social progress, more generally. The objective of this study is to look at a prominent national program for researchers in Mexico - Sistema Nacional de Investigadores (SNI) - to assess additional productivity and promotion heterogeneity by gender across career trajectories and disciplinary boundaries. Tracing productivity and promotion activity for 18,799 researchers active in the SNI program from 1991 to 2011, the analysis uncovers the following: while female researchers are associated with more productivity than males at each stage of the program, they are less likely to attain higher levels of promotion as they progress through their career. Illustratively, our more conservative results indicate women are associated with 1.2 more publications than men the year prior to promotion to Level 2 from Level 1 in SNI. Yet, 13 percent of women are associated with Level 2 promotion compared to 22 percent of men. To contextualize our understanding of these patterns, we interviewed SNI participants and include empirical assessments to unpack what may explain these perplexing results. While significant female representation in the applicant pool is needed to improve the gender gap, only a marginal increase in the gender representation of the reviewer pool is needed to reduce it significantly. This result points to a novel underexplored mechanism to inform future studies and policy - that of evaluative salience. While this does not fully address gender bias in the sciences, a shift in salience from applicants to reviewers may be an important precursor to address more structural ills around gender inequality.
Indexed as
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.