Elsevier

Bone

Volume 107, February 2018, Pages 27-35
Bone

Full Length Article
Bibliometric analysis of authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over the past three decades of BONE's publication history

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2017.10.026Get rights and content

Abstract

The existence of a gender gap in academia has been a hotly debated topic over the past several decades. It has been argued that due to the gender gap, it is more difficult for women to obtain higher positions. Manuscripts serve as an important measurement of one's accomplishments within a particular field of academia. Here, we analyzed, over the past 3 decades, authorship and other trends in manuscripts published in BONE, one of the premier journals in the field of bone and mineral metabolism. For this study, one complete year of manuscripts was evaluated (e.g. 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015) for each decade. A bibliometric analysis was then performed of authorship trends for those manuscripts. Analyzed fields included: average number of authors per manuscript, numerical position of the corresponding author, number of institutions collaborating on each manuscript, number of countries involved with each manuscript, number of references, and number of citations per manuscript. Each of these fields increased significantly over the 30-year time frame (p < 10 6). The gender of both the first and corresponding authors was identified and analyzed over time and by region. There was a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors from 23.4% in 1985 to 47.8% in 2015 (p = 0.001). The percentage of female corresponding authors also increased from 21.2% in 1985 to 35.4% in 2015 although it was not significant (p = 0.07). With such a substantial emphasis being placed on publishing in academic medicine, it is crucial to comprehend the changes in publishing characteristics over time and geographical region. These findings highlight authorship trends in BONE over time as well as by region. Importantly, these findings also highlight where challenges still exist.

Introduction

According to the dictionary definition, the “gender gap” simply refers to the differences between men and women in areas such as economics, politics, etc. [1]. However, in more recent years, it has come to denote disparities in compensation (including financial and corporate/academic position) between men and women with equal skills and training [2]. The biggest question has become “why?” Why does this gap exist, and what factors created this gap? As of 2017, women make up 49.6% of the world population [3]. Since the end of World War II, the percentage of female students in universities increased from 32% to 56% [4]. With such statistics, it would seem intuitive that women should also hold ~ 50% of professional-level jobs. However, women only hold 14.6% of CEO positions and only comprise 8.1% of top earners financially [5]. These discrepancies are similar in medicine. Women comprise 47% of medical students and 46% of residents; however, they account for 21% of full-time professors, 15% of department chairs, and 16% of deans [6], [7], [8]. As publications are an important indicator of a person's scholarly output and reputation, one of the factors responsible for this discrepancy in professional equality may be the number of publications.

The primary purpose of a publication is to advance knowledge in a given field. In academia, publications are also a crucial factor for personal advancement in both the field and the promotion tenure track [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Additionally, publications are gaining importance in the application process for professional schools, graduate schools, and residency programs [15]. Reviewing the authorship trends of academic journals, as well as the correlation to the increase in females pursuing academic roles, provides valuable information regarding the degree to which the gender gap does or does not prevail and likely future trends for women in academic medicine.

The journal BONE focuses on “basic, translational and, clinical aspects of bone and mineral metabolism” [16]. It was hypothesized the while the percentage of female authors would increase overtime, the percentage of females authors would still be lower than the percentage of male authors, even in 2015. Therefore, the purpose of this study to undertake a historical analysis of BONE with a specific focus on authorship gender.

Section snippets

Data collection process: manuscripts

Authorship trends in BONE were performed over a 30 year period. The data was analyzed in ten-year intervals dating from 1985 to 2015. This periodic sampling technique has been previously described and validated [17], [18], [19], [20], [21]. We selected 1985 as the starting year, and 2015 as the final year, as it was the most recent year with a complete set of publications since our study commenced in 2016. The gender of both the first author and the corresponding author were documented, which

Results

A total of 899 publications met the inclusion requirements; there were 67 from 1985, 258 from 1995, 219 from 2005, and 355 from 2015.

Discussion

Publication is a crucial aspect of developing an academic career and is also used as a measurement of achievement and productivity within a specific field [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. In order to establish whether or not modern gender parity has had any impact on female authorship in the bone and mineral metabolism field, we studied the gender of first and corresponding authors in BONE over the last 30 years (1 year per decade: 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015). When discussing authorship, two of

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the Center for Research and Learning RISE Program, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (FK), an NIH T32 training grant AR065971 (JDR, JPF), the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine (MAK, RTL), the Garceau Professorship Endowment and Rapp Pediatric Orthopaedic Research Fund, Riley Children's Foundation (RTL), and the Ruth Lilly Medical Library (ECW). This work was also supported by the Ralph W. and Grace M.

References (38)

  • U.S.C. Bureau

    International Programs: International Data Base

    (2017)
  • J. Warner

    Women's Leadership. What's True, What's False and Why it Matters

    (2014)
  • S. Fitzpatrick

    A Survey of Staffing Levels of Medical Clinical Academics in UK Medical Schools as at 31 July 2014

    (2015)
  • M. Angell

    Publish or perish: a proposal

    Ann. Intern. Med.

    (1986)
  • E. Halperin

    Publish or perish-and bankrupt the medical library while we're at it

    Acad. Med.

    (1999)
  • U.S. Neill

    Publish or perish, but at what cost?

    J. Clin. Invest.

    (2008)
  • R.A. Brumback

    “3‥ 2‥ 1‥ Impact [factor]: target [academic career] destroyed!” just another statistical casualty

    J. Child Neurol.

    (2012)
  • T.C. Erren et al.

    Analyzing the publish-or-perish paradigm with game theory: the prisoner's dilemma and a possible escape

    Sci. Eng. Ethics

    (2016)
  • S.S. Hasan et al.

    Publish or perish: a mandate with negative collateral consequences

    Acad. Med.

    (2017)
  • Cited by (19)

    • Sex Bias in Laryngology Research and Publishing

      2022, Journal of Voice
      Citation Excerpt :

      When author sex could not be ascertained, a “baby name guesser” website (https://www.gpeters.com/names/baby-names.php) was used to identify sex. The method of inputting a first name and assuming the correct sex with a likelihood ratio of 3.0 or higher has been validated and used previously.31–33 Authors not identified on the internet or by the name guesser were excluded.

    • Assessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Neurosurgery Literature: A 20-Year Analysis of Sex Trends in Authorship

      2020, World Neurosurgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Lack of this academic productivity, as noted in neurosurgery,5 may suggest why female neurosurgeons still lag behind their male counterparts in academic career progression. Although the proportion of female authors in the medical literature has increased in other specialties such as cardiology,10 dermatology,17 and radiology18 over the last decade, authorship in surgical specialties is largely dominated by male authors.19-28 This trend in authorship remains particularly unspecified in neurosurgery where there is a lack of female mentors and a growing concern over stunted academic promotions and salary deficits for female surgeons.29

    • Comparative analysis of authorship trends in the Journal of Hand Surgery European and American volumes: A bibliometric analysis

      2020, Annals of Medicine and Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, with improved speed and ease of communication, we posit that institutions with different resources and expertise have been encouraged to collaborate more than was previously possible. This observation, along with the increasing emphasis on publication for obtaining registrar/residency and/or faculty positions, leads us to anticipate that the number of co-authors and institutions per manuscript has increased over time for JHS, similar to other disciplines [16–18]. The primary purpose of this study was to analyze gender and authorship trends over the past 30 years for JHSE, to expand upon the previous JHSA study [2], and to compare volumes of a specialty journal published on different continents.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Contributed equally to this work.

    View full text