Female authorship of covid-19 research in manuscripts submitted to 11 biomedical journals: cross sectional study

Abstract

Objective To describe prominent authorship positions held by women and the overall percentage of women co-authoring manuscripts submitted during the covid-19 pandemic compared with the previous two years. Design Cross sectional study. Setting Nine specialist and two large general medical journals. Population Authors of research manuscripts submitted between 1 January 2018 and 31 May 2021. Main outcome measures Primary outcome: first author’s gender. Secondary outcomes: last and corresponding authors’ gender; number (percentage) of women on authorship byline in “pre-pandemic” period (1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019) and in “covid-19” and “non-covid-19” manuscripts during pandemic. Results A total of 63 259 manuscripts were included. The number of female first, last, and corresponding authors respectively were 1313 (37.1%), 996 (27.9%), and 1119 (31.1%) for covid-19 manuscripts (lowest values in Jan-May 2020: 230 (29.4%), 165 (21.1%), and 185 (22.9%)), compared with 8583 (44.9%), 6118 (31.2%), and 7273 (37.3%) for pandemic non-covid-19 manuscripts and 12 724 (46.0%), 8923 (31.4%), and 10 981 (38.9%) for pre-pandemic manuscripts. The adjusted odds ratio of having a female first author in covid-19 manuscripts was <1.00 in all groups (P<0.001) compared with pre-pandemic (lowest in Jan-May 2020: 0.55, 98.75% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.70). The adjusted odds ratio of having a woman as last or corresponding author was significantly lower for covid-19 manuscripts in all time periods (except for the two most recent periods for last author) compared with pre-pandemic (lowest values in Jan-May 2020: 0.74 (0.57 to 0.97) for last and 0.61 (0.49 to 0.77) for corresponding author). The odds ratios for pandemic non-covid-19 manuscripts were not significantly different compared with pre-pandemic manuscripts. The median percentage of female authors on the byline was lower for covid-19 manuscripts (28.6% in Jan-May 2020) compared with pre-pandemic (36.4%) and non-covid-19 pandemic manuscripts (33.3% in Jan-May 2020). Gender disparities in all prominent authorship positions and the proportion of women authors on the byline narrowed in the most recent period (Feb-May 2021) compared with the early pandemic period (Jan-May 2020) and were very similar to values observed for pre-pandemic manuscripts. Conclusions Women have been underrepresented as co-authors and in prominent authorship positions in covid-19 research, and this gender disparity needs to be corrected by those involved in academic promotion and awarding of research grants. Women attained some prominent authorship positions equally or more frequently than before the pandemic on non-covid-19 related manuscripts submitted at some time points during the pandemic.

Prospective analyses of sex/gender-related publication decisions in general medical journals: editorial rejection of population-based women’s reproductive physiology

“…24 While another group had also documented disparities in women authorship for COVID-19 research, 37 the analysis of Gayet-Ageron et al specifically found that research about or related to COVID-19 topics resulted in women not holding prominent first and last/senior author positions more often at the beginning of the pandemic compared with during the prepandemic. 24 While it is known that women took on more responsibilities in the early stages of the pandemic (ie, childcare/caretaking, homeschooling, household demands) these reported discrepancies further exacerbate the gender biases and inequalities women face in publication of original research. Despite significant differences in how women and men experience diseases and drug effects, most research and funding has focused on topics and medications that are more relevant to men.…”

“…A recent BMJ article by Gayet-Ageron et al analysed women’s authorship position during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to COVID-19-specific research. 24 While another group had also documented disparities in women authorship for COVID-19 research, 37 the analysis of Gayet-Ageron et al specifically found that research about or related to COVID-19 topics resulted in women not holding prominent first and last/senior author positions more often at the beginning of the pandemic compared with during the prepandemic. 24 While it is known that women took on more responsibilities in the early stages of the pandemic (ie, childcare/caretaking, homeschooling, household demands) these reported discrepancies further exacerbate the gender biases and inequalities women face in publication of original research.…”

“…Gayet-Ageron et al recently showed that, not only were women authors less likely in general, they were particularly less likely to be authors on recent COVID19-related research. 24 Decisions made at the editorial board level have reportedly been linked to fewer publications and less knowledge concerning women's health. 25 Thus, biases in medical research publication may negatively influence the clinical care women receive.…”

“…Gayet-Ageron et al recently showed that, not only were women authors less likely in general, they were particularly less likely to be authors on recent COVID19-related research. 24 …”

Mind the gender gap: COVID-19 lockdown effects on gender differences in preprint submissions

“…Second, unlike previous studies, we provide a systematic analysis of academic fields. Some scholars have examined very broad areas of knowledge, such as mathematics, physics, or economics [ 13 – 15 ], while others have focused on journals on a very specific topic, such as medicine [ 19 , 20 ] or biological sciences [ 21 ]. Our study seeks to fill this gap by covering a total of 10 academic fields and 250 sub-fields.…”