The effect of mentee and mentor gender on scientific productivity of applicants for NIH training fellowships
Yu, H.; Willis, K. A.; Litovitz, A.; Harriman, R. M.; Davis, M. T.; Meyer, P.; Busse, B.; Meseroll, R. A.; Wijayatilake, H. D.; Perkins, M. J.; Anderson, J. M.; Santangelo, G. M.
Show abstract
Several studies have suggested that women in science are less productive than men, and that this gap contributes to their under-representation in the ranks of senior researchers. However, few studies have examined the role of mentoring, and in particular mentor gender, on the productivity of female scientists early in their careers. Such efforts are limited by the difficulties of unambiguously linking mentees to their mentors and measuring the research productivity resulting from those relationships. Here we use our novel author disambiguation solution to investigate the role of self-identified gender in mentorship of 12,932 trainees who either successfully or unsuccessfully applied to the National Institutes of Health for research fellowships between fiscal years 2011 and 2017, applying a multi-dimensional framework to assess productivity. We found that, after normalizing for the funding level of mentors, the productivity of female and male mentees is indistinguishable; it is also independent of the gender of the mentor, other than in measures of clinical impact, where women mentored by women outperform other mentee-mentor dyads.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications 94%
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 94%
- Controlled experiment finds no detectable citation bump from Twitter promotion 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Are we moving the dial? Canadian Health Research Funding Trends for Women's Health, 2S/LGBTQ+ Health, Sex, or Gender Considerations 92%
- MetaFun: Unveiling sex differences in multiple omics studies through comprehensive functional meta-analysis 88%
- Consideration of sex as a biological variable in diabetes research across twenty years 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Full Publication of Preprint Articles in Prevention Research: An Analysis of Publication Proportions and Results Consistency 92%
- A natural language processing system for the efficient extraction of cell markers 91%
- Researcher and Clinician Preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool: A Mixed-Methods Survey and Focus Group Study 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.