Gender differences in scientific productivity and visibility in core neurosurgery journals: Citations and social media metrics

Sotudeh, Hajar; Dehdarirad, Tahereh; Freer, Jonathan

doi:10.1093/reseval/rvy003

Cited by 13 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings regarding the last authorship position, contradicts the ones from Thelwall [ 9 ], which found a small female last author disadvantage in immunology, parasitology and virology. It is however in line with a study by Sotudeh, Dehdarirad, Freer [ 20 ] in the field of neurosurgery, which found a higher average of citations for female first and last authors.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Shifting to the push method on social media might also potentially reduce gendered gatekeeping in the dissemination of research [ 15 ]. For example, some studies on social media and gender have found that females had a higher visibility in terms of Web citations [ 18 ], average Mendeley readers [ 19 , 20 ], profile views on Academia.Edu in certain disciplines [ 21 ], or event counts from Twitter [ 14 , 20 ], blogs, and news [ 14 ]. Others found similar visibility for both female and male scholars in blogs, news, Facebook, or LinkedIn.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Others found similar visibility for both female and male scholars in blogs, news, Facebook, or LinkedIn. [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

Dehdarirad

2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, it was investigated whether early tweets counts could differentially benefit female and male (first, last) authors in terms of the later citation counts received. The data for this study comprised 47,961 articles in the research area of Life Sciences & Biomedicine from 2014–2016, retrieved from Web of Science’s Medline . For each article, the number of received citations per year was downloaded from WOS, while the number of received tweets per year was obtained from PlumX. Using the hurdle regression model, I compared the number of received citations by female and male (first, last) authored papers and then I investigated whether early tweet counts could predict the later citation counts received by female and male (first, last) authored papers. In the regression models, I controlled for several important factors that were investigated in previous research in relation to citation counts, gender or Altmetrics. These included journal impact (SNIP), number of authors, open access, research funding, topic of an article, international collaboration, lay summary, F1000 Score and mega journal. The findings showed that the percentage of papers with male authors in first or last authorship positions was higher than that for female authors. However, female first and last-authored papers had a small but significant citation advantage of 4.7% and 5.5% compared to male-authored papers. The findings also showed that irrespective of whether the factors were included in regression models or not, early tweet counts had a weak positive and significant association with the later citations counts (3.3%) and the probability of a paper being cited (21.1%). Regarding gender, the findings showed that when all variables were controlled, female (first, last) authored papers had a small citation advantage of 3.7% and 4.2% in comparison to the male authored papers for the same number of tweets.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

Dehdarirad

2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lay summaries are a potential factor initially proposed by Didegah, Alperin & Haustein (2018) but its association with altmetric counts is yet a matter of question. Author genders also found to be an important factor on some altmetric platforms (Sotudeh, Dehdarirad, & Freer 2018). Table 1 lists all these different variables and their descriptions; few variables and how they were measured are further explained below.…”

Section: Dependent Independent and Control Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

To What Extent Does the Open Access Status of Articles Predict Their Social Media Visibility? A Case Study of Life Sciences and Biomedicine

Dehdarirad¹,

Didegah

2020

joa

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to determine whether, and to what extent, the OA status and OA type of articles can predict their social media visibility, when controlling for a considerable number of important factors. Those factors, which previous research confirmed their positive association with altmetric counts, were journal impact, individual collaboration, research funding, number of MESH topics, topic, international collaboration, lay summary, being a mega journal, F1000 Score, and gender of first and last authors. The data for this study comprised 83,444 articles and reviews in the research area of Life Sciences and Biomedicine from 2012-2016, retrieved from Medline in November 2018. The results showed that the percentage of OA articles mentioned on altmetric platforms was significantly higher than those of the non-OA articles. Furthermore, Open Access was significantly associated with a higher probability of a paper being mentioned on the studied social media platforms. Compared to non-OA articles, the OA articles had a higher average of tweets, Facebooks posts, news posts, and blog posts. By increase of a unit in the OA status, the average number of tweets, Facebooks posts, news posts, and blog posts increased by 92.7%, 25.7%, 83.9% and 48.4%, respectively. Regarding the OA types (studied as Gold vs non-Gold), our findings showed that the Gold OA articles had a higher average number of Tweets and a higher probability of being mentioned in tweets and blogs.

show abstract

“…Gender disparity in the distribution of authorship credit is another social challenge. Underrepresentation and lower visibility of women in publications are reported in male-dominate research areas such as Computer Sciences (Wang et al 2019), Political Sciences (Williams et al 2015), and Neurosurgery (Sotudeh, Dehdarirad, and Freer 2018). Even in fields such as Higher Education where the gender composition of scholars is more balanced, gender inequity is still noticeable (Williams et al 2018).…”

Section: Social Challenges and Authorship Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Is authorship sufficient for today’s collaborative research? A call for contributor roles

Vasilevsky

Hosseini

Teplitzky

et al. 2020

Accountability in Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assigning authorship and recognizing contributions to scholarly works is challenging on many levels. Here we discuss ethical, social, and technical challenges to the concept of authorship that may impede the recognition of contributions to a scholarly work. Recent work in the field of authorship shows that shifting to a more inclusive contributorship approach may address these challenges. Recent efforts to enable better recognition of contributions to scholarship include the development of the Contributor Role Ontology (CRO), which extends the CRediT taxonomy and can be used in information systems for structuring contributions. We also introduce the Contributor Attribution Model (CAM), which provides a simple data model that relates the contributor to research objects via the role that they played, as well as the provenance of the information. Finally, requirements for the adoption of a contributorship-based approach are discussed.

show abstract

Gender differences in scientific productivity and visibility in core neurosurgery journals: Citations and social media metrics

Cited by 13 publications

References 56 publications

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

Could early tweet counts predict later citation counts? A gender study in Life Sciences and Biomedicine (2014–2016)

To What Extent Does the Open Access Status of Articles Predict Their Social Media Visibility? A Case Study of Life Sciences and Biomedicine

Is authorship sufficient for today’s collaborative research? A call for contributor roles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About