ArticlePloS one2026
Gender distribution in authorship on research submissions at the European College of Veterinary Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress: 2012-2022.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to explore gender distribution for authors on research presentations at European College of Veterinary Surgeons (ECVS) Annual Scientific Meetings from 2012-2022. Our populations for data collection included the ECVS Diplomate membership and authors listed for research submissions at the ECVS Annual Scientific Meetings between 2012-2022. Data was extracted from Conference Programs including year, first, second and senior (last) author names, and session type (scientific poster, short communication, resident forum). Authors were assigned a binary gender using a web-based algorithm to determine gender by first name. Gender demographics for ECVS Diploma holders between 1993-2023 was obtained from the ECVS Office for comparison to assess gender representation proportional to the specialty organisation, again this was based on a binary gender archetype. Although there are limitations to this approach, it is consistent with methodology in contemporaneously published papers in the human medical and veterinary fields. We identified 1353 research presentations, of which 1292 had complete information for all authors. At first author, men and women approached parity, but second and senior authors were more commonly men with the discrepancy being most marked at senior author level, and in the resident forum. If the first or senior author was a man, it was significantly more likely the second author would also be a man. There were no changes in authorship trends across the decade evaluated. In conclusion, women approached parity for first author but were under-represented as second and particularly senior author. In veterinary medicine, credit researchers receive is typically based on their position in the author list. First and senior author are more valued positions, with senior author usually having ownership of the project. Second author is the most valuable of the junior co-author positions but carries lower prestige than first or senior author. Further research is required to investigate underlying reasons contributing to ongoing gender disparity at senior author.
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.