Women on multiple sclerosis clinical trial steering committees

Moneim, Joseph; Coles, Alasdair; Giovannoni, Gavin; Horne, Rachel; Carr, Oliver

doi:10.1002/ana.25306

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current dearth of female leaders in academic neurology means that the lack of visibility of women in this field has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Pharmaceutical companies are particularly guilty of overlooking women in both the clinical trial arena, as has been demonstrated previously, 8 and as we have demonstrated at satellite symposia at ECTRIMS. New initiatives, such as International Women in MS, which has developed from a desire to foster a supportive and inspirational community for women working in the field of MS, are being developed.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…Clinical trial steering groups, 8 pharmaceutical advisory boards, and journal editorial boards all have considerable roles in directing research and development direction, and yet female MS experts are overlooked in these influential areas. The effect of any gender disparity in clinical or academic MS neurology is impossible to study; however, in a female preponderant disease, gender balance in clinical research leaders is important in influencing aspects of research and care delivery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo establish the gender distribution of multiple sclerosis (MS) researchers across high-impact neurologic publications, MS-specific journals, and the European Committee for Treatment and Research in MS (ECTRIMS).MethodsJournal editorial boards and contents were retrieved online to assess first-named and senior authors. Published tables of contents for each journal from 2017 were reviewed. Congrex, the ECTRIMS organizers, were contacted and speaker names were obtained from online abstracts to assess visible opinion leaders.ResultsA total of 2,080 articles were analyzed across 4 general neurology journals, and 452 across 2 MS journals. Overall, 36% of general neurology articles had a female first name author and 25% had a female senior author. In MS-specific journals, 44% of first authors and 35% of senior authors were female, with similar proportions of unique authors. There is limited female representation on the ECTRIMS executive board, but reasonable balance on Council. Almost 50% of attendees in 2017 were female, but only 35% of invited speakers.ConclusionsThere is substantial female drop-off between junior and senior research level across multiple areas. Strategies to support gender balance are urgently required, including developing mentorship schemes, ensuring gender balance in conferences, and thorough examination of the barriers facing female academics with direct challenges to address unconscious bias.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We thank Moneim and colleagues for calling attention to the issue of gender inequality in MS clinical trial steering committees and in authorship on publications emerging from phase 3 clinical trials . Gender inequality is a long‐standing problem in publication practices in general, as well as in neurology, academic medicine, and science, so it is not surprising to see it reflected in the field of multiple sclerosis (MS).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Inequities in the Multiple Sclerosis Community: A Call for Action

2018

Annals of Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Women are even less represented as authors of seminal MS clinical trials (23%). 4 Some studies suggest that female gender is associated with perceived lower value in science. Following a change in grant funding programs in 2014, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research examined the success rates of male and female applicants and concluded that recognized gender gaps in funding were "attributable to less favorable assessments of women as principal investigators, not of the quality of their proposed research."…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognizing the diversity gap in multiple sclerosis

Marrie

2019

Mult Scler

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent lecture at a well-attended international meeting prominently featured the scientific contributions of several men to the advancement of our understanding of the pathology, diagnosis, and treatment in multiple sclerosis (MS). Strikingly, at least to the women in the audience, there was no reference to the contributions of even one woman. In this issue of Multiple Sclerosis Journal (MSJ), Dr McCombe seeks to balance the historical record by highlighting the key role that women scientists have played in advancing the field of MS with respect to domains such as pathology, immunology, epidemiology, as well as related fields such as genetics. 1 Dr McCombe also notes that women are still substantially underrepresented in scientific leadership roles in influential organizations within the field. Several other recent publications have highlighted the gender gap in health research, and in MS research in particular. A review of largely physician-focused recognition awards from the American Academy of Neurology found that during the 10-year period from 2008 to 2017, the proportion of women receiving awards increased only slightly from 24.7% to 31.5%. In contrast, the proportion of women physicians employed in academic neurology departments increased by 25% between 2009 and 2015. 2 Thomson et al. examined 2,080 articles published in four general neurology journals (Annals of Neurology, JAMA Neurology, Brain, and Neurology), and 452 published in two MS journals (MSJ, and Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders) in 2017. 3 Overall, only 25% of senior authors in general neurology journals were women, while MS journals fared only slightly better at 36%. Women are even less represented as authors of seminal MS clinical trials (23%). 4 Some studies suggest that female gender is associated with perceived lower value in science. Following a change in grant funding programs in 2014, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research examined the success rates of male and female applicants and concluded that recognized gender gaps in funding were "attributable to less favorable assessments of women as principal investigators, not of the quality of their proposed research." 5 Double-blind peer review is associated with greater acceptance rates of publications by female first authors, 6 which also suggests that gender influences the perceptions of the reviewer.Why should we care about the lack of recognition and under-representation of women, as well as under-representation of minority racial, ethnic or other groups in the global MS research community? John Donne articulated it well when he said that, No [person] is an island entire of itself; every [person] is a piece of the continent, a part of the main … And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. 7In other words, we all lose. Some of those losses are intuitively obvious-we lose the intellectual capital, contributions, and perspectives of talented individuals. Less intuitive is how those lost contributions may inhibit progress toward understanding a...

show abstract

Women on multiple sclerosis clinical trial steering committees

Cited by 12 publications

References 5 publications

Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research

Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research

Gender Inequities in the Multiple Sclerosis Community: A Call for Action

Recognizing the diversity gap in multiple sclerosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About