Back

Changing Faces of Authorship: A Study of Gender, Race, Regional Disparities in Gastroenterology/Hepatology-related RCTs. A Two Decade Analysis (2000-2022)

Kumari, R.; Sadarat, F.; Luhana, S.; Parkash, O.; Chander, S.

2023-08-29 gastroenterology
10.1101/2023.08.28.23294747 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate gender, racial, ethnic, and regional disparities in first and senior authorship positions in gastroenterology/hepatology-related randomised controlled trials (RCT). DesignRetrospective bibliometric analysis of PubMed-indexed RCTs published between January 2000 to December 2022 in leading journals with an impact factor of at least five. Results943 RCTs met our inclusion criteria, providing a participant pool of 301 female (15.96%) and 1,585 male (84.04%) authors from 37 countries (70% high-income countries). Despite a significant increase in the proportion of female authors in first and senior authorship positions between 2000 and 2022 (p<0.001), females were grossly underrepresented in both authorship positions, with a male-to-female ratio of 4.45 and 6.37, respectively. The male-to-female ratio was highest among Asian authors (7.79) than among White (4.22), Hispanic (1.44), and Black (1) authors in the first authorship position. In contrast, the male-to-female ratio was similar for Asian (6.2) and White (6.67) authors in the senior authorship position, with a low underlying frequency of Hispanic and Black female authors. There were statistically significant differences in gender distribution for first authorship at the country level (p=0.0018). Binary logistic regression analysis showed significant positive effects of the senior author being a female ({beta}=1.124, p<0.001) and the senior author having PhD qualification ({beta}=0.753, p=0.021) on female first authorship. ConclusionDespite significant improvements in gender, racial and ethnic representation in first and senior authorship of gastroenterology/hepatology-related RCTs published in high-impact journals, progress toward parity remains slow. Targeted interventions to improve author diversity are warranted.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.