ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2026
Where Are the Women in Basic Science Research? Gender Trends in Abstracts Presented at the Academic Surgical Congress.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 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
Abstract
introductionOver the past decade, the number of women in surgery has increased. We aimed to assess whether these gender trends were similarly reflected across all types of surgical research.
methodsWe reviewed abstracts accepted for oral presentations at the Academic Surgical Congress from 2015 to 2025 and compared differences in senior authors' gender across basic/translational, clinical/outcomes, and education research. Our primary outcome was female representation across research types. Our secondary outcome was female representation over time.
resultsA total of 2504 abstracts were included in our analysis. Women comprised about 24% of all senior authors and increased from 20% in 2015 to 36% in 2025; however, this change was not uniform across surgical research types. Women were underrepresented in basic/translational science (18.2%) compared to clinical/outcomes (24.1%) and education research (41.9%; P < 0.001). Compared to men, women were significantly more likely to author clinical/outcomes (odds ratio: 1.38, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.78, P = 0.012) and education abstracts (odds ratio: 2.99, 95% confidence interval: 2.07-4.33) than basic/translational science abstracts. Women senior authors were younger in academic age than men (median years since graduation: 18.0 versus 21.3, P < 0.001). After adjusting for authors' academic age, women remained significantly less likely to author abstracts in basic/translational science than education. Women were also less likely to have abstracts in more than one category of research or to have multiple abstracts presented.
conclusionsThere is a relative paucity of women senior authors compared to men, especially in basic/translational science research. Future studies are needed to better understand and address the causes of this disparity.
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.