Authorship Trends Research Articles

Gender equity in authorship of emergency medicine publications in Australasia.

To evaluate gender authorship trends in the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM), Emergency Medicine Australasia (EMA). A bibliometric review of author gender in EMA during the 10-year period 2013-2022. The gender of first/last authors were determined by www.genderize.io, or a manual internet search where gender was not determined with at least 90% certainty. Descriptive statistics were used with percentages of women as first and last author compared to current percentages of ACEM Fellows (FACEMs) who identify as women. The final analysis included 1703 articles. Women accounted for 27.4% fewer authors than men (36.3% vs 63.7%). Women were outnumbered by men by 20.0% among first authors (40% vs 60%), and 36.2% (31.9% vs 68.1%) for last authors. When the last author was a woman, there was a similar rate of women (49.2%) and men (50.8%) as first authors. However, when the last author was a man, first authors were 37.1% women versus 62.9% men. If the last author was a woman, there was a 60% greater probability that the first author was also a woman (odds ratio 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-2.1). First authorship rate by women was equal to or exceeds the proportion of women FACEMs, however, last authorship by women still lags behind. The emergency medicine community in Australasia must continue to tackle existing gender disparities which exist in our specialty. A creative and active strategy on the part of publishers, editors, academics and authors is needed to redress this balance.

Thematic Evolution and Scholarly Contributions: A Study of the Top 100 Most Cited Papers in the Journal of Religion and Health.

The Journal of Religion and Health (JORH) has significantly contributed to the intersection of spirituality and healthcare since its inception in 1961. We analyzed the top 100 most cited papers published in JORH, which may provide insights into authorship patterns, institutional affiliations, and publication dynamics. The data was retrieved from the Scopus database. Details about the annual growth rate of publications, citation metrics, authorship trends, and collaboration patterns among authors, universities, and countries are provided. A total of 3,359 papers were published in JORH. The top 100 most cited papers exhibited an annual growth rate of 3.14%. The average age of these documents was 12.8years, with each paper receiving an average of 88.87 citations. The analysis identified 289 authors contributing to these highly cited works, of which 11 authors produced single-authored documents, resulting in 12 single-authored papers. The co-authorship rate averaged 3.27 authors per document, with an international collaboration rate of 16%, indicating moderate global engagement. The authors were affiliated with 141 universities across 21 countries. Performance metrics, including the number of papers, citations, h-index, g-index, m-index, HG composite, and q2 index, highlighted the contributions of top authors. The analysis also included a focus on the thematic evolution of papers through unigram, bigram, and trigram analyses. This bibliometric study of the top 100 most cited papers in JORH may underscore the journal's role in fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and highlight areas for future research.

Principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviour: a systematic review of research

PurposeThe purpose of this review was to expand the knowledge base regarding the relationship between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviours drawing on a database of 87 studies. The study utilized four different data sources (WoS, Scopus, ERIC, and Google Scholar).Design/methodology/approachDescriptive and content analysis methods were used to highlight the key tends in this literature, including growth trajectory, authorship trends, citation impact, quantitative research techniques, the composition of leadership styles, and detailed mediators and moderators.FindingsThe results revealed that transformational leadership was the most frequently studied leadership style. The study synthesized how principal leadership directly and indirectly affects teachers’ OCBs. The findings were interpreted considering existing educational leadership and management (EDLM) literature.Originality/valueGiven the rapid growth of research on the linkage between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs and the fact that the field has been missing a comprehensive review to lay out the relevant literature on this topic, it is important to systematically review and scrutinize the relationship between leadership styles and teachers’ OCB. Reviewing this literature will provide guidance for future researchers through identifying major methodological gaps and suggesting recommendations for future directions. This study is the first review on the relationship between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviours (OCBs).

EXAMINING CARBON QUANTUM DOTS RESEARCH IN TURKEY: A SCIENTIFIC MAPPING ANALYSIS

The bibliometric analysis presented in this work is thorough and comprehensive, carefully examining the wide range of contributions related to "carbon dots" and "carbon quantum dots" in Turkish research from 2014 to 2023. Using Biblioshiny as the major analytical tool and the Web of Science database, this study methodically breaks down the annual trends, regional spreads, institutional ties, authorship trends, and the complex clusters of keywords in this field. After a comprehensive analysis of international and local citations, the research identifies a noteworthy yearly growth rate of 14.72% for Turkey's carbon dot project. Starting with one manuscript in 2014, the research output increased rapidly, reaching sixty critical documents by the end of May 2024. This thorough study clarifies important publication sources; in particular, it emphasizes ChemistrySelect and the publication of Fluorescence as two of the field's top contributors. This thorough evaluation significantly contributes to our knowledge of the state of carbon studies in Turkey, providing priceless insights and a guide to advise and set the direction for future research projects in this continuously developing field, especially for researchers and academics connected with "carbon dots".

Gender Disparity in Surgical Research: An Analysis of Authorship in Randomized Controlled Trials

IntroductionDespite increasing female representation in medical fields, women remain underrepresented in high-impact authorship positions. This study examines gender disparities in authorship of randomized controlled trials in general surgery journals over the past 20 y. MethodsUtilizing PubMed and the Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023), we identified 8810 randomized controlled trials from 117 surgery journals, filtering down to 5694 studies for final analysis. Gender identification was performed using Genderize.io. ResultsResults indicate that women accounted for 26.4% of first authorships and 18.7% of last authorships. Logistic regression revealed that a male last author significantly increases the likelihood of a male first author (odds ratio 2.68; 95% confidence interval 2.18-3.32). Over time, there is a positive trend in female authorship, with high correlation coefficients for both first (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.916, P < 0.005) and last (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.878, P < 0.005) authors. Interestingly, journal quartiles did not significantly influence the gender of first authors. ConclusionsThese findings suggest persistent gender inequity in surgical research authorship, influenced by mentorship dynamics. The study underscores the need for strategies to enhance female representation in academic leadership to foster a more equitable scholarly environment. Limitations include reliance on Genderize.io for gender determination and the focus on general surgery journals, which may omit relevant studies from other domains. Overall, this research highlights incremental progress toward gender equality in surgical academia, advocating for continued efforts to close the gender gap.

Evolving Computer Science Education Research in Teaching and Learning: A Bibliometric Analysis

This study performed a bibliometric analysis of computer science education (CSE) publications in teaching and learning. The research trend in computer science education was analysed using publications from the Scopus-indexed database between 1970 and 2021. This study aims to summarize this information to assist three groups of stakeholders: educators, researchers and policymakers. Our review goal to document and analyse the trends in CSE research publications for teaching and learning. A total of 800 publications were derived for further assessment based on computer science education in the article title with multiple tools. We used, Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer and Harzing’s Publish or Perish were utilized for frequency analysis data visualization and citation metrics and assessment. The study outcomes were documented with standard bibliometric indicators: publication growth, authorship trends, collaboration, prolific authors, national contribution, most active establishments, top-cited articles, preferred journals, intellectual structure and topical trends. Resultantly, CSE research publications have perpetually grown for the past 51 years since 1970 with the United States highlighting the largest study contributor, followed by Germany and the United Kingdom. The ACM SIGCSE Bulletin published the highest number of CSE research publications. The analysis of the cluster on topical trends indicates that curriculum design and implementation (e.g., assessment, broadening participation), elements of teaching and learning (e.g., constructivism, e-learning, game-based learning) and other areas of interest comprise pedagogical approach (e.g., computational thinking, k-12 education, motivation). Based on the research results, we expand on the findings and propose how authors might enhance the CSE function in curriculum design, implementation and shifts could eventually substitute past study clusters.

The Laissez-Faire Leadership Style in Higher Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review

Given the growing interest in laissez-faire leadership in higher education since 2014, this study was conducted to review scholarly publications on laissez-faire leadership in educational research, drawing on a database of 69 studies published between 2014 and 2024. Descriptive methods, including the volume of publication, journal and geographic distribution, types of studies, authorship trends, citation impact, research methods, and identified outcomes associated with laissez-faire leadership, were utilized to identify the main characteristics of the literature. The review revealed that the majority of published research consists of empirical studies, with a notable increase in qualitative approaches in recent years. Key findings highlighted significant relationships between laissez-faire leadership and various outcomes, such as academic performance, faculty satisfaction, innovation, and institutional effectiveness. Additionally, the review underscores the importance of contextual factors, including institutional culture and regional differences, in shaping the effectiveness of laissez-faire leadership. Recommendations were provided to increase the quality and depth of research on laissez-faire leadership in higher education, particularly in addressing gaps in cross-cultural and longitudinal studies.

Academic Neurosurgery Gender and Authorship Trends in the United States.

Women represent ∼20% of the national neurosurgical resident cohort but only ∼10% of academic neurosurgeons in the United States. Recognizing that the publication of scientific literature contributes to academic advancement, we measured authorship trends of academic neurosurgeons to query publication differences as an explanation for the discrepancy of female representation in academic positions. Physician data were obtained from program and individual physician webpages. Annual total, first author, and senior author publications were recorded for each neurosurgeon from 1980 to 2020. Mean publication number as a function of the year relative to residency graduation was calculated for all, first author, and senior author publications for all timepoints with >50 individuals. The mean first years of publication were compared using unpaired 2-tailed t-tests. The slope of publication for the senior author and all publications was calculated using individual best-fit lines from years 0 to 10 relative to residency graduation. Overall, 1601 faculty members were evaluated (female = 167 [10.4%], male = 1434 [89.6%]). First-author publication for female members peaked at 0.60 publications/year, and for male members at 0.80 publications/year, both at -1 year from graduation (P = .038). Female first publication occurred earlier (-2.4 vs 1.45 years; P < .00001). The mean increase in all publications/year from years 0 to 10 was 0.25 for women and 0.28 for men (P = .68). The increase in senior publications/year was 0.11 for women and 0.13 for men (P = .39). The ratio of total publications to the Scopus h-index was 3.08 for women and 3.62 for men (P = .07). These data suggest that women publish earlier but have fewer first-author publications at -1 year, the timepoint of peak publication for both genders. There was no significant gender difference in rates of the first author and all publications over the years 0 to 10. The ratio of publications to the h-index did not differ significantly but showed a trend suggesting that women produce higher-impact articles and may need fewer publications to achieve the same change in the h-index.

Equity and representation in cardiology research: a comprehensive analysis of authorship from low and low-middle income countries in leading cardiology journals

Abstract Background Cardiovascular disease is the leading global cause of mortality, with low-income and low-middle-income countries (LICs/LMICs) bearing a disproportionate burden. Despite this, research output is skewed towards affluent regions. This study aims to assess the authorship trends from LICs/LMICs in cardiology research in 5 of the leading cardiology journals. Methods PubMed authorship affiliation was obtained from 2000-2022 in (1) Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC), (2) Circulation, (3) Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Cardiology, (4) Nature Reviews Cardiology, (NRC) and (5) European Heart Journal (EHJ). Countries were classified according to the World Bank. Results 62873 original research, clinical cases, editorials, and reviews were published in all five journals (2000-2022). The percentage of articles with at least one author affiliated with an institution from a LIC or LMIC was 1.03% (N=652): 0.96% (N=190) in JACC, 0.82% (N=198) in Circulation, 2.42% (N=51) in JAMA Cardiology, 0.84% (N=22) in NRC, and 1.33% (N=191) in EHJ. There has been an increase in the representation of authorship from LICs and LMICs in the last decade. However, the distribution of authorship between LMICs and LICs is uneven, represented mainly -by Mozambique, Uganda, Sudan, and Ethiopia for LICs, and India, Iran, Egypt, Pakistan and Lebanon for LMICs. Discussion: Our findings reveal an underrepresentation of authors from institutions from LICs and LMICs in these 5 leading cardiology journals. Efforts to enhance funding, access, and inclusion of authors from LICs and LMICs are imperative to advance global cardiovascular outcomes and promote equity in medical research.

A 20-year analysis of gender trends in oncology authorship in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

The objective of this study was to evaluate global longitudinal publication trends in oncology in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) from 2001-2020. Retrospective bibliometric analysis. The primary outcome measures were the numbers and percentages of women as first, last, and corresponding author across all CDSR oncology publications. Additional outcomes included authorship differences between countries and percentages of women authors over time compared using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. In total, 548 articles were analyzed. Women were first authors in 52.26% (n=277) and corresponding authors in 50.75% (n=272), respectively. Women represented only 39.4% (n=210) of last authors, significantly less frequent than male counterparts (p < 0.001). The percentage of women last and corresponding authors has increased significantly in the past 20 years (p < 0.05). Countries such as the Netherlands and Australia consistently showed equitable representation in first, corresponding, and last authorship, while other countries such as Italy and China had uniformly low rates of female authorship. Our results highlight patterns of gender inequity in oncology publication authorship in the CDSR from 2001-2020 at a global level. Notably, women were less likely to serve in the last author position which, independent of assigned corresponding authorship, is generally assumed in academic oncology to designate the leader of a published study. Substantive efforts to correct this disparity are needed to achieve gender parity in publicly perceived leadership in oncology publications.

Scholarly impact of student authorship in urology research

BackgroundH-index is an indicator of research productivity considered in faculty promotion. We examine trends in female authorship and effect of student authorship on H-index of principal investigators (PI). MethodsAuthor gender, degree, designation as student, PI, or other, were recorded from Journal of Endourology from 2011 to 2020. PI Scopus H-index was recorded. PIs were classified into having student authors (SA) or not (nSA). Analysis conducted with IBM SPSS. ResultsOf 819 total articles, 26 ​% had SA. Articles with SAs increased from 22.2 ​% in 2011 to 31.1 ​% in 2020 (p for trend<0.01). There was an increasing trend in female authorship overall (R2 ​= ​0.84). PIs with SA had a significantly higher mean H-index than those without, across all years (SA ​= ​30.91, nSA ​= ​27.45, p ​= ​0.025). ConclusionsStudent authorship is increasing and positively benefits PI H-index. Female authorship is increasing overall within urology. Encouraging mentorship and student research can enhance and support female student interest in urology.

S2153 Gender and Regional Trends in Authorship of Clinical Trials Published in Leading Gastroenterology and Hepatology Journals From 2009 to 2024

S2153 Gender and Regional Trends in Authorship of Clinical Trials Published in Leading Gastroenterology and Hepatology Journals From 2009 to 2024

Authorship Dynamics in Multidisciplinary Research: A Focus on Library and Information Science Professionals in RRIJM

This study looks into bibliometric studies in library and information science (LIS) to learn more about the influence of professional collaborations and multidisciplinary publication. It centers on user behaviour, digital libraries, and information management. The study uses bibliometric methodologies to examine authorship trends, geographic distribution, research paper length, and references. The results enhanced comprehension of the importance of library science in academic communities by emphasizing its function in handling intricate problems and promoting information sharing. Data from the Research Review International Journal of Multidisciplinary has been used in the study.

Trends in authorship of original articles in three high-impact medical journals: a decade-by-decade analysis from 2003 to 2023

Trends in authorship of original articles in three high-impact medical journals: a decade-by-decade analysis from 2003 to 2023

Women and men in library and information science scholarship: Authorship trends from 2003 to 2021

Library and information science (LIS) has long consisted of more women than men, at least in sheer numbers of library employees, but men are the primary authors of library literature. This study explores LIS literature published between 2003 and 2021 to identify if there are differences in the publishing patterns of women and men. The authors used content analysis to code the entire sample to identify overall subject trends after authors were categorized as women or men by mainly automated methods, using two R packages, genderize and ssa. The results show that there are overall inequities when compared to the profession as whole between the publishing rates of women and men in LIS, as well as differences in publication patterns by subjects and within specific journals. Shifts in subjects over the period under investigation did not increase the percentage of women publishing in the selected LIS journals. The authors conclude more research needs to be conducted to determine the cause of inequities in publishing not just among women and men, but all underrepresented voices in LIS.

A Review of Authorship Inflation and Multicenter Collaboration Trends in Orthopedic, Medical, and Surgical Journals Over the Last 60 Years.

Over the past six decades, authorship numbers in academic publications have increased significantly, a phenomenon known as authorship inflation. This study aims to analyze comparative authorship trends and the influence of multicenter collaborations across major orthopedic, medical, and surgical journals. We reviewed metadata from The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Annals of Surgery (AS), and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) from January 1, 1960, to December 31, 2019. The number of authors per publication, the prevalence of multicenter studies, and their correlation were analyzed. Data was visualized using heat maps and box plots, and trends were statistically tested using the Jonckheere-Terpstra, Mann-Kendall, and generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). A total of 73,062 articles were analyzed, with 1,190 articles identified as originating from multicenter studies. The number of multicenter trials was found to have increased significantly over time (p < 0.001), plateauing in NEJM but continuing to rise in JBJS and AS. There was a significant increase in authorship numbers per publication over time, across all journals (p < 0.0001). There was a significant statistical correlation (p < 0.0001) as indicated by the coefficient of determination (r2), for the association between the proportion of publications with >10 authors and the proportion of multicenter publicationsacross all three journals. Authorship inflation in academic publishing may be attributable to the rise in multicenter collaborations. The rate of increase in authorship was more pronounced in medical and surgical journals compared to orthopedic journals, reflecting differing trends across specialties. These findings highlight the evolving nature of research collaboration and authorship practices in academic publishing.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Academic Productivity in Oncology: A Journal-, Conference- and Author-Level Analysis.

This study assessed the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on academic productivity in oncology, measured by conference abstracts, journal publications and individual authorship trends, using a reference time frame of 2018 to 2022. To assess overall academic productivity, data was obtained on the number of abstracts and articles submitted and published from a selection of oncology conferences and journals. To assess individual authorship patterns, 200 articles were randomly selected from 2018, and for the first or last authors, publications were tracked over subsequent years. Factors assessed included gender, continent, specialty, MD vs. non-MD and career status (early vs. late). The number of submitted and published conference abstracts trended downward over time between 2018 and 2022 (p=0.11 and p=0.16 respectively). Journal submissions increased to a peak in 2020 and then declined thereafter, but this did not translate into changes in the number of papers published. For the author-level analysis, factors significantly predictive of increasing publication rates in multivariable analysis were late career status (vs. early), clinician status (vs. non-clinician), surgery or public health/epidemiology specialty, and author located in Asia. Further research is needed to help ameliorate the impact of these disparities.

Scientific production in sexual and reproductive health and rights research according to gender and affiliation: An analysis of publications from 1972 to 2021.

Peer-reviewed literature is commonly used to assess academic progress and research excellency. However, representation in authorship of global health publications is biased and unfair. In order to shed light on current gaps towards attaining gender equality in scientific production and shift power asymmetries in global health research, we conducted an assessment of authorship trends from 1972 to 2021 with a focus on gender and geographic representation in scientific articles authored or co-authored by researchers affiliated with UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP). We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and HRP public reports for publications where at least one author was affiliated with HRP. Our main outcome measures were author gender and location of author affiliation, classified by region and country income group. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the publications under analysis as well as the total number of authors from the included papers. We applied a logistic regression model to explore associations between author gender and other characteristics of published articles and a time series analysis to assess how time can influence the inclusion of women as authors in a publication. Python and R were used for all analyses. A total of 1,484 publications with 14,424 listed authors representing 5,950 unique authors were included in our analysis: 42.5% were female, 35.1% male, and 22.4% unknown (p<0.0001). First authorship was more likely female (56.9%) and from a high-income country (74.6%, p<0.0001) while last authorship was mostly male (53.7%) also from a high-income country (82.5%, p<0.0001). Females more frequently published papers using qualitative data (61.4%) and reviews/estimates (59.4%) while men published more case control (70.7%) and randomised controlled studies (53.0%), p<0.0001. The adjusted odds of there being a female author increased 4% for every additional year that passed. While there are more females authoring articles as compared to the past, they are still lagging behind with regards to seniority and prestige. Likewise, female representation is closely tied to what institution they are affiliated with and where that institution is located. Global health research institutions need to actively promote change by ensuring women are included in research and research outputs, giving them opportunities to lead.

Gender Trends in Authorship of Gastroenterology Randomized Controlled Trial Literature.

We describe female authorship trends in gastroenterology (GI) randomized controlled trial literature as a novel focus on gender bias in academic GI. Using a systematic PubMed search, we extracted GI randomized controlled trial reports published from 2011 to 2022. We describe time trends in proportions of females among first and last authors overall and within GI subspecialties and high-impact journals. The proportion of females increased from 25.4% to 36.8% and from 14.3% to 24.8% among first and last authors, respectively. Smaller increases in female authorship occurred in most subgroups, although there were proportionately fewer females among authors in high-impact journals and advanced therapeutic endoscopy publications. Over the past decade, female authorship in GI RCT reports has increased. However, female representation, particularly among senior authors and in high-impact journals, remains significantly lower. Despite recent improvements, female still constitutes a minority of the authors of original GI RCTs.

Trends in Gender Authorship of Abstract Presentations at Plastic Surgery the Meeting: A Decade Long Analysis.

Current literature fails to examine gender differences of authors presenting abstracts at national plastic surgery meetings. This study aims to assess the ratio of female to male abstract presentations at Plastic Surgery The Meeting (PSTM).The gender of all abstract presenters from PSTM between 2010 and 2020 was recorded. The primary outcome variable was authorship (first, second, or last). Trends in gender authorship were assessed via Cochran-Armitage trend tests. Chi-square was utilized to evaluate the association between author gender and presentation type and author gender and subspecialty.Between 2010 and 2020, 3653 abstracts were presented (oral = 3035, 83.1%; poster = 618, 16.9%) with 19,328 (5175 females, 26.8%) authors. Of these, 34.5%, 32.0%, and 18.6% of first, second, and last authors were female, respectively. The total proportion of female authors increased from 153 (20.4%) in 2010 to 1065 (33.1%) by 2020. The proportion of female first, second, and last authors increased from 21.8% to 44.8%, 24.0% to 45.3%, and 14.3% to 22.1%, respectively, and demonstrated a positive linear trend ( P < 0.001 ). The proportion of female first authors in aesthetics (23.9%) was lower than that for breast (41.8%), cranio/maxillofacial/head & neck (38.5%), practice management (43.3%), and research/technology (39.4%) ( P < 0.001 ).Our study demonstrates a significant increase in female representation as first, second, and last authors in abstract presentations at PSTM within the last decade, although the absolute prevalence remains low.