Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Meta-research examining author gender, geographic location, and institutional affiliation

Abstract

Introduction Authors of knowledge syntheses make many subjective decisions during their review process. Those decisions, which are guided in part by author characteristics, can impact the conduct and conclusions of knowledge syntheses, which assimilate much of the evidence base in medical education. To better understand the evidence base, this study describes the characteristics of knowledge synthesis authors, focusing on gender, geography, and institution. Methods In 2020, the authors conducted meta-research to examine authors of 963 knowledge syntheses published between 1999 and 2019 in 14 core medical education journals. Results The authors identified 4,110 manuscript authors across all authorship positions. On average there were 4.3 authors per knowledge synthesis (SD = 2.51, Median = 4, Range = 1–22); 79 knowledge syntheses (8%) were single-author publications. Over time, the average number of authors per synthesis increased (M = 1.80 in 1999; M = 5.34 in 2019). Knowledge syntheses were authored by slightly more females (n = 2047; 50.5%) than males (n = 2005; 49.5%) across all author positions. Authors listed affiliations in 58 countries, and 58 knowledge syntheses (6%) included authors from low- or middle-income countries. Authors from the United States (n = 366; 38%), Canada (n = 233; 24%), and the United Kingdom (n = 180; 19%) published the most knowledge syntheses. Authors listed affiliation at 617 unique institutions, and first authors represented 362 unique institutions with greatest representation from University of Toronto (n = 55, 6%). Across all authorship positions, the large majority of knowledge syntheses (n = 753; 78%) included authors from institutions ranked in the top 200 globally. Conclusion Knowledge synthesis author teams have grown over the past 20 years, and while there is near gender parity across all author positions, authorship has been dominated by North American researchers located at highly ranked institutions. This suggests a potential overrepresentation of certain authors with particular characteristics, which may impact the conduct and conclusions of medical education knowledge syntheses.

The Voices of Medical Education Science: Describing the Published Landscape

“…Similar to what we found in medical education knowledge syntheses, 4 we observed in the current study that just under half of authors were affiliated with highly ranked academic institutions, suggesting that these institutions may have a disproportionate level of influence in the field. However, we were encouraged to find contributions from a variety of entities, such as professional associations, federal agencies, and nonprofits.…”

“…This study, which leverages a unique and sizable data set, provides a snapshot of the last two decades of medical education research published in a core set of journals, with a focus on author characteristics. Similar to our previous bibliometric work on knowledge syntheses, 4,7 we found that the number of medical education articles has grown substantially over the past 20 years. What is more, similar to our previous work, there appears to be a trend towards greater gender parity overall; although male-dominated imbalances in specific authorship positions still persist.…”

“…Academic publishing is the primary means of disseminating scientific knowledge in medical education, and the researchers who author those publications drive scientific advancement. However, recent research across scientific disciplines suggests that author diversity, as measured by gender and race, 1,2 as well as international representation, as measured by country of origin and institutional affiliation, 3,4 are lacking. This lack of diversity and representation is important because, as many scholars have argued, more diverse teams do better science.…”

“…The purpose of this study was to replicate and expand on our previous bibliometric work 4,7 by describing the authorship landscape of the last 20 years of medical education literature, using the largest database of scholarship assembled to date. In the present study, we examined all articles published between 2000 and 2020 in the Medical Education Journals-24 (MEJ-24) to identify article characteristics, with an emphasis on author gender, geographic location, and institutional affiliation.…”

“…5,6 In 2021, Maggio and colleagues examined author diversity and representation through two bibliometric studies describing 963 knowledge syntheses appearing in 14 medical education journals between 1999-2019. 4,7 In these two studies, we attempted to describe the medical education community writ large by providing a bibliometric snapshot of the field's knowledge syntheses, with a focus on publication characteristics and author gender, country affiliation, and institution. The intent of this work was to provide insights into the landscape of knowledge syntheses, with an emphasis on understanding the authors whose voices are shaping the medical education discourse and evidence.…”