An Analysis of Female Plastic Surgery Authorship: Where Are We Today?

Abstract

Background: Authorship in a peer-reviewed journal is highly regarded in both the academic and private sectors of plastic surgery. Recently, several articles have cited an increased contribution from women in the plastic surgery literature; however, none to date has analyzed the demographic trends of these female authors. The purpose of this study was to conduct an analysis of female authors in three well-known plastic surgery journals. Methods: Articles published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery, and Aesthetic Surgery Journal between January of 2015 and December of 2015 were reviewed. Supplemental journal, review, and CME articles were excluded. First, second, and last authors from the United States were reviewed and stratified by a number of categories, including sex, geographic location, and title. Results: Two-thousand fifty authors were reviewed. Of these, 20 percent of first authors, 24 percent of second authors, and 15 percent of last authors were women. Female representation was fairly equal among the journals, and 39 percent of women authors were international. Overall, 16 percent of fully trained plastic surgeon authors and 25 percent of resident authors were women, as compared to 15 percent female fully trained plastic surgeons and 36.2 percent female residents represented in the overall community. Conclusions: Faculty are on par with national percentages of women plastic surgeons; however, women residents have lower representation in the literature than in the community as a whole. Residents and faculty must promote productivity of the younger generation of women plastic surgeons to continue increasing contributions of women to the specialty.

Location, Location, Location: The Geographic Impact of Medical School on the Plastic Surgery Match

“…14 While there certainly remains much to accomplish regarding gender equity in plastic surgery, the recent increase in literature regarding the topic may explain the improving gender equity; however, additional dedicated studies would be beneficial in further examining these trends. [15][16][17] Although this study offers many valuable insights, it is not without limitations. Most significantly, this study only examines trends among students who successfully matched into integrated plastic surgery; therefore, the data and trends reported within this study are by no means representative of all students that applied.…”

Opportunity Costs of Internal Promotions in Plastic Surgery: Are Women Given a Fair Shot?

“…Discussion publications, for instance, are reserved for expert opinion on a nuanced topic, but expert selection can be biased and unregulated. Although women comprise 15%–24% of the authorship cohort in the plastic surgery literature, 10 less than 10% of discussions are offered to these individuals by invitation. Preferences for private over academic practices among female plastic surgeons have been suggested to explain academic attrition and disparate productivity between men and women, 11 yet our results demonstrate that greater than one-third of invited discussants in fact do not hold academic appointments at ACGME training programs.…”

Women in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery: An Analysis of Female Authorship in Cosmetic Plastic Surgery Over the Last 10 Years

“…Our data, like others, suggest that male first authors are predicted by male senior authorship. 15 Thus, fostering greater female-male mentorship may help address this gender disparity.…”

“…It is not surprising that there are fewer female last authors compared with first authors. First authors have tended to be residents, 15 and while increasingly more females comprise the current pool plastic surgery residents, only 14% to 17% of plastic surgery faculty are female. 16,17 An interesting finding, not previously investigated, in our work was the trend of female authorship observed across manuscript subcategory.…”