Knowledge syntheses in medical education: Examining author gender, geographic location, and institutional affiliation

Abstract

Purpose 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. Therefore, to better understand the evidence base, this study describes the characteristics of knowledge synthesis authors, focusing on gender, geography, and institution. Method In 2020, the authors conducted a case study of authors of 963 knowledge syntheses published between 1999 and 2019 in 14 core medical education journals using a publicly accessible dataset. Results The authors of the present study 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 (Pearson Χ2=22.02, p<.001). Authors listed affiliations in 58 countries, and 58 knowledge syntheses (6%) included authors from low- or middle-income countries (LMIC). 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 the University of Toronto (n=55, 6%) and the Mayo Clinic (n=31, 3%). Across all authorship positions, the large majority of knowledge syntheses (n=753; 78%) included authors at top 200 ranked institutions. Conclusions 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 knowledge syntheses in medical education.

The leaky pipeline of publications and knowledge generation in medical education

“…Buffone et al conducted an investigation into publications in seven major medical education journals over a 10-year period and reported that publications with lead authors from the Global South (Asia, Africa and South America) were less than 21%, even though these continents represent around 85% of the world population [4]. Maggio et al conducted an analysis of knowledge syntheses in medical education, uncovering who drives the knowledge conversations in medical education [5]. They reported that only 6% of knowledge synthesis in health professions education included authors from low or middle income countries.…”