ArticleJTCVS open2026
Authorship asymmetry at the Women in Thoracic Surgery Inaugural Annual Conference: Gender pairings and senior status disparity.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Representation of women in academic thoracic surgery has steadily increased over time. However, gender disparities continue to propagate at higher levels of career advancement, with women remaining drastically underrepresented among senior positions. Mentorship, particularly through scholarly collaboration, is a well-recognized mechanism to promote career advancement and support for trainees and junior faculty. We aimed to characterize authorship patterns from the Women in Thoracic Surgery Inaugural Annual Conference to gain insight into the current landscape of gender dynamics in academic mentorship. Methods: This was a retrospective study of all 98 abstracts submitted to the 2024 Women in Thoracic Surgery Inaugural Annual Conference. Abstracts were categorized by subspecialty/topic (thoracic, cardiac, congenital, workforce/other). We utilized Genderize.io, a validated algorithmic tool, to infer the gender of first and senior authors based on names, applying a 95% confidence threshold for correct gender assignment. The primary outcome was gender distribution and concordance between first and senior authors by gender. Results: Of the 98 submitted abstracts, 47 (48%) focused on thoracic surgery topics, 31 (32%) on adult cardiac surgery, 2 (2%) on congenital cardiac surgery, and 18 (18%) on workforce/other themes. Among these abstracts, 81 (83%) had female first authors, 16 (16%) had male first authors, and 1 could not be determined. Senior author roles were predominantly held by men, consisting of 55 men (56%) compared with 43 women (44%), which was statistically significant ( Conclusions: Although the 2024 Women in Thoracic Surgery Inaugural Annual Conference served as a platform that enabled strong representation of women first authors, senior authorship remains skewed toward men. This gender disparity in senior authorship highlights ongoing gaps in academic advancement pathways. These findings underscore the critical importance of intentional mentorship and sponsorship by senior faculty of all genders to support the equitable progression of women in academic thoracic surgery.
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.