ArticleScientific reports2026
Structural barriers drive gender inequality across academic careers in Brazilian ecology.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- From brain drain to brain circulation: evidence from women scientists in OWSD Honduras National Chapter.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although women often outnumber men in the early stages of academic careers in ecology, they remain significantly underrepresented in senior positions. In Brazil, women comprise the majority of graduate students in ecological sciences but hold fewer senior academic roles, receive less research funding, and face greater obstacles to visibility and recognition. To understand the factors contributing to this disparity, we conducted a nationwide survey with 283 Brazilian ecologists, analysing gender-based differences across career stages. Using descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and correspondence analysis (ANACOR), we examined experiences related to gender identity, parenthood, workplace dynamics, and scientific productivity. Our findings reveal persistent structural inequalities: women, particularly in early-career stages, reported more frequent experiences of gender discrimination and sexual harassment, limited access to leadership roles, lower publication rates, and heightened concerns about personal safety during fieldwork. Women more commonly cited personal and professional constraints as factors influencing their academic permanence. Overall, both men and women identified a lack of funding as the primary barrier to scientific productivity. These results underscore the intersectional barriers to gender equity in ecology and emphasise the urgency of structural, evidence-based reforms to build more inclusive academic environments.
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.