Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41117402›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of ophthalmology2026

25-year analysis of gender and professional trends in authorship of highly cited articles in leading ophthalmology journals.

Angelica Piccini, Amaal Khan, Donald Solomon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of ophthalmology, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Angelica PicciniCooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, NJ, USA.ORCID 0009-0004-2768-7049
Amaal KhanCooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, NJ, USA.
Donald SolomonCooper University Health Care, Camden, NJ, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-6931-8176

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PurposeUnderstanding trends in female researcher representation can inform strategies to improve equity in academic ophthalmology. This study evaluates authorship and citation trends over 25 years amongst the highest-cited articles in leading ophthalmology journals to assess female co-authorship and differences in authors' degrees in publications at a highly visible research level.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 443 authors who published the most highly cited articles in high-impact journals from 2000 to 2024. Articles were chosen as the three most cited articles per year from the three highest-impact ophthalmology journals per h5-index. Identities were confirmed via institutional websites, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Gender and degrees were determined using professional profiles. Outcomes included authorship position, first-last author pairings, citation impact, and differences in authors' degrees by gender.ResultsFrom 2000 to 2024, female first authorship rose 38.11%, and overall authorship 43.73%. Female last authorship, though lowest, increased the most (53.63%). Female co-authorship and overall representation peaked in 2010-2014. Male first-authored papers had more citations (

Indexed as

AuthorshipOphthalmologyPeriodicals as TopicPublishingBibliometricsFemaleHumansJournal Impact FactorMaleRetrospective StudiesSex Factorsacademic ophthalmologyauthorshipGender equitymentorshippublication trends

Identifiers

PMID41117402
PMCPMC12929640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.