Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40828015›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

The rise of diversity terminology in biomedical research.

Brandon L Kramer, Catherine Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Brandon L Kramer *The Graph Foundation, New York, NY 10028.ORCID 0000-0002-3233-5310
Catherine Lee *Rutgers University, Department of Sociology, New Brunswick, NJ 08901.ORCID 0000-0002-2247-8297

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent scholarship has highlighted the rise of "diversity projects" across various educational and business contexts, but few studies have explored the meaning of diversity in biomedical research. In this paper, we employ a computationally driven matching technique to examine quantitative trends in the use of various forms of diversity and population terminology in a sample of nearly two million biomedical abstracts spanning a 30-y period. The curated dictionaries we leverage to detect these trends were formalized into open-source software that are publicly available for other researchers to use. Our analyses demonstrate marked growth in diversity, sex, gender, life course, and socioeconomic terms while terms relating to race and ethnicity largely plateaued or declined in usage, beginning in the mid-2000s. In addition, the use of national, continental, and subcontinental population labels increased dramatically over the same period. We also present logistic regression analyses to investigate what may be fueling the rise in use of diversity terminology. We argue that the use of diversity has grown to encompass concepts beyond its historical origins in race-based programs as it has in fields like higher education and employment. Despite some critics' claims regarding the role of diversity in research, we do not find evidence that its use signals retreat from or commitment to equity and inclusion efforts.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCultural DiversityTerminology as TopicEthnicityFemaleHumansMalebiomedicinecomputational text analysisdiversityrace and ethnicitysex and gender

Identifiers

PMID40828015
PMCPMC12403007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.