medigraphic.com

2022, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Anest 2022; 45 (3)

Gender difference in three anesthesiology journals: Colombian, Mexican and Cuban

Cordero-Escobar I, Haylok-Lorr C, Quesada-Peña S

Language: Spanish
References: 41
Page: 156-162
PDF size: 285.50 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: In scientific publications there is a gender bias demonstrated between women and men. Objective: To identify in three Anesthesiology and Resuscitation journals: Colombian, Mexican and Cuban, the differences between women and men as principal authors of scientific articles in the last five years. Material y methods: A descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted in three journals: The Mexican Magazine, the Colombian Magazine and the Cuban Journal of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation, in the period between January 2013 to December 2018. To do this, requested the consent of the Director of the Magazine to review the gender of the main author and the type of publication made in the last five years. Results: A total of 779 articles from the three magazines mentioned above were analyzed. Of these, 293 were principal authors of articles and 488 were men. The man-woman ratio was 1.71 in the Mexican magazine, 1.84 in the Colombian magazine and 1.38 for the Cuban one. Most of the editorials were written in the Colombian and Mexican Magazines, by men while in the Cuban Magazine women predominated. So, also behaved the originals, review articles and clinical cases. Conclusions: Anesthesiologist women publish 2.6 times less articles than men, a fact that was confirmed in the three journals analyzed, so in the area, the gender gap is maintained in the scientific publications of the specialty.


REFERENCES

  1. Gino F, Wilmuth CA, Wood BA. Compared to men, women view professional advancement as equally attainable, but less desirable. Harvard Business School. [In line] [Consulted January 12, 2019;112:12354-12359. Available in: www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1502567112/-/DCSupplemental.

  2. Sánchez de Madariaga I. Una herramienta para la innovación de género en la investigación científica. [En línea]. [Consultado: Febrero 26, 2019]. Available in: http://www.ciencia.gob.es/stfls/MICINN/Investigacion/FICHEROS/Elgeneroenlainvestigacion.pdf

  3. European Commission. Research and Innovation. Manual El género en la investigación. Madrid. Yellow Window Management Consultants Engender Genderatwork ed. Capítulo 1. 2011. 1.1-3.1

  4. Enright A. Perspectives of a female president of WFSA. Int Anesthesiol Clin. 2018;56:128-140.

  5. Toledo P, Duce L, Adams J, Ross VH, Thompson KM, Wong CA. Diversity in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Leadership. Anesth Analg. 2017;124: 1611-1616.

  6. Rebello E, Wong CA, Calmes S. Women of ASA: history, status and scope. ASA Newsletter. 2014; 78: 58-60.

  7. Bur J. DOJ's female investigators get fewer opportunities (and they know it). June 26, 2018. En línea. Consultado: Febrero 26, 2019. Disponible: https://www.federaltimes.com/management/career/2018/06/26/dojs-female-investigators-get-fewer-opportunities-and-they-know-it/

  8. Haylock-Loor C, Filipescu D, Khan F, Mellin-Olsen J, Onajin-Obembe B, Yazbeck P, Gastao F. Duval Neto. et al. The gender gap. In: Gastao F. Duval Neto et al. Occupational well-being in anesthesiologists. WFSA, 2014, 308-334.

  9. Lifshitz A. La ética en las publicaciones médicas. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2013;51:604-605.

  10. Organización Mundial de Naciones Unidas. Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible. Objetivo 5. En línea. [Consultado: Junio 28] 2019. URL. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/es/gender-equality/

  11. Miqueo C. ¿Feminismo en el mundo científico médico? ISEGORÍA. Isegoría. 2008;38:155-167.

  12. Sugimoto CR. Woman in Science. Nature 2013. En línea. [Consultado: Febrero 26, 2019. Disponible: https://www.agenciasinc.es/Noticias/Por-cada-articulo-cientifico-firmado-por-una-mujer-como-autora-principal-hay-dos-liderados-por-hombres.

  13. Sugimoto CR, Ni C, West JD, Larivière V.) The academic advantage: gender disparities in patenting. PLoS ONE 2015;10:e0128000. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128000

  14. Sugimoto CR, Larivière V, Ni C, Gingras Y, Cronin B. Bibliometrics: global gender disparities in science. Nature 2013;504:211-213.

  15. Magnusson C. The gender wage gap in highly prestigious occupations: a case study of Swedish medical doctors. Work, Employment & Society. 2016;30:40-58.

  16. Wong CA, Stock MC. The status of women in academic anesthesiology: a progress report. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:178-184.

  17. Inestrosa NC, Méndez B, Allende J, Krauskopf M, Soto E. Publicaciones y patentes. En: Allende JE, Babul J, Cárdenas-Jirón G, Cárdenas G, Castilla JC, Cooper T, et al. Análisis y proyecciones de la ciencia chilena. Santiago de Chile. 2005. 70-109.

  18. Boiko JR, Anderson AJM, Gordon RA. Representation of women among academic grand rounds speakers. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:722-724.

  19. Leslie K, Hopf HW, Houston P, O'Sullivan E. Women, minorities, and leadership in anesthesiology: take the pledge. Anesth Analg. 2017;124(5):1394-1396.

  20. Baird M, Daugherty L, Kumar K B, Arifkhanova A. Regional and gender differences and trends in the anesthesiologist workforce. Anesthesiology. 2015;123:997-1012.

  21. Del Valle Rojas, Caldevilla Domínguez D, Pacheco Silva C. La trayectoria de mujeres investigadoras en revistas científicas en español. Rev Latina Comunicación Social. 2015;70:4-65. doi: 10.4185/RLCS-2015-1054.

  22. Symonds MR, Gemmell NJ, Braisher TL, Gorringe KL, Elgar MA. Gender differences in publication output: towards an unbiased metric of research performance. PLoS ONE. 2006;1:e127. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000127

  23. Dayal A, O'Connor DM, Qadri U, Arrora V M. Comparison of male vs female resident milestone evaluations by faculty during emergency medicine residency training. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2017;177:651-657.

  24. Filardo G, da Graca B, Sass DM, Pollock BD, Smith EB, Martinez MA. Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994-2014). BMJ. 2016;352:i847.

  25. Pashkova AA, Svider PF, Chang CY, Diaz L, Eloy JA, Eloy JD. Gender disparity among US anesthesiologists: Are women underrepresented in academic ranks and scholarly productivity? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013;57:1058-1064.

  26. Amrein K, Langmann A, Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Pieber TR, Zollner-Schwetz I. Women underrepresented on editorial boards of 60 major medical journals. Gend Med. 2011;8:378-387.

  27. Mehta S, Burns KE, Machado FR. Gender parity in critical care medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;196:425-429.

  28. Cotter D, Hermsen J, Vanneman R. The American People Census 2000: Gender inequality at work. Russell Sage Foundation, New York. 2000.

  29. Ovseiko PV, Greenhalgh T, Adam P. A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment. Health Res Policy Sys. 2016;14:50.

  30. Bryant LD, Burkinshaw P, House AO, West R M, Ward V. Good practice or positive action? Using Q methodology to identify competing views on improving gender equality in academic medicine. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015973.

  31. Caffrey L, Wyatt D, Fudge N, Mattingley H, Williamson C, McKevitt C. Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e012090.

  32. LSE Impact Blog: Las diferencias en la productividad y publicación académica entre hombres y mujeres. En línea. [Consultado enero 30], 2019. Publicado: 22 enero 2019. Disponible: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/01/22/differences-in-mens-and-womens-academic-productivity-persist-and-are-most-pronounced-for-publications-in-top-journals/

  33. Parkman A. The imposter phenomenon in higher education: incidence and impact. J Higher Edu Theory and Practice. 2016;16:51.

  34. Mayer S, Rathmann J. Las diferencias en la productividad y publicación académica entre hombres y mujeres persisten; son más pronunciadas dentro de las principales revistas. [En línea] [Consultado: Febrero 12, 2019]. LSE Impact Blog. Disponible en: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/01/22/differences-in-mens-and-womens-academic-productivity-persist-and-are-most-pronounced-for-publications-in-top-journals/

  35. Barry M, Talib Z, Jowell A. Steering Committee of the Women Leaders in Global Health Conference. A new vision for global health leadership. Lancet. 2017;390:2536-2537.

  36. Duguid MM, Thomas-Hunt MC. Condoning stereotyping? How awareness of stereotyping prevalence impacts expression of stereotypes. J Appl Psychol. 2015;100:343-359.

  37. Logan D. The importance of a gender-balanced editorial team. Narrowing the gender gap begins with all of us. Elsevier. 2016. [In line] [Consulted April 11, 2019]. URL: https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/publishing-trends/The-importance-of-a-gender-balanced-editorial-team

  38. López-Bassols V, Grazzi-Charlotte Guillard M, Salazar M. Las brechas de género en ciencia, tecnología e innovación en América Latina y el Caribe. Banco Iberoamericano del desarrollo. (En línea) [Consultado: junio 12, 2019]. 2018, 5-45. Disponible en: http://www.iadb.org.

  39. García CMM. Desigualdades de género también en la investigación en salud pública. Sinc 2018. En línea. [Consultado junio 10, 2019]. Disponible en: https://www.agenciasinc.es/Opinion/Desigualdades-de-genero-tambien-en-la-investigacion-en-salud-publica

  40. Martínez Y. Sólo el 30% de los científicos europeos son mujeres. Tendencias sociales 2018. (En línea) [Consultado: Junio 3, 2019]. Disponible en: https://www.upm.es/sfs/Rectorado/Gerencia/Igualdad/Documentos/cifras.pdf

  41. Flexman AM, Parmar A, Lorello GR. Representation of female authors in the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of articles between 1954 and 2017. Can J Anesth. 2019;66:495-502.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com