ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026
Radiation Oncology Representation in German Evidence-Based Oncological Guidelines: 2025 Analysis of Participation and Parity from Women in Radiation Oncology Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO).
Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender disparities in academic radiation oncology research: A narrative review.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2027Review
- Radiation Oncology Representation in German Evidence-Based Oncological Guidelines: 2025 Analysis of Participation and Parity from Women in Radiation Oncology Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO).Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- Gender disparities in historical context, workforce structure, and decision-making.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Germany, the development of evidence based medical guidelines is overseen by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). Ensuring balanced representation across medical specialties and genders is essential for generating comprehensive, equitable, and unbiased treatment recommendations. This study evaluates the involvement of radiation oncology (RO) specialists and assesses gender representation within the panels of German oncological guidelines.
methodsWe analysed all oncological guidelines in the AWMF registry (n = 93/820). Data were collected from AWMF's registry, the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) website, and affiliated organizations including the Working Group for Radiation Oncology (ARO) and the Professional Association of German Radiation Oncologists (BVDST). Gender distribution, academic qualifications, and participation rates were analysed.
resultsOf 93 oncological AWMF guidelines, RO panel members participated in 71 (76.3%), with particularly high representation in S3 (highest standard of quality and reliability) guidelines (92.5%). A total of 2795 panelists were represented in 85 analysable oncological guidelines, with 28.3% being female. Among the 255 RO panelists, the proportion of women is significantly higher with 34.5% (p < 0.05), with varying distribution across organizations: DEGRO 38.6%, ARO 31.7%, and BVDST 28.2%. Academic qualifications regarding all panelists differed significantly by gender (p < 0.001) with a high proportion of professors being male (81.3%), while women were disproportionately represented among those no academic title (62.6%).
conclusionsRO demonstrates strong representation in German oncological guideline development, in contrast to international trends where the specialty is frequently underrepresented. Nonetheless, consistent with patterns observed across other medical disciplines and healthcare systems, gender disparities remain evident: women constitute roughly one-third of overall panel members. These findings establish an important reference point for tracking future progress toward achieving gender equity in the formulation of oncological guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41369757What 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.