Rationale and Objectives
Women are under-represented in radiology, but the implications of this under-representation are poorly understood. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if articles published by women in major radiology journals were more collaborative.
Materials and Methods
Following an institutional review board exemption, we reviewed all original research articles in Radiology , in the American Journal of Roentgenology , and in Academic Radiology from 2011 to 2015. For each article, the gender of the first and the last authors and proxy measures of collaboration were recorded, including the total number of authors, female authors, departments, and institutions. Nominal logistic regression analysis was used to test for associations while controlling for confounders.
Results
There were 1934 articles analyzed. Female first and last authors represented 30.2% (585 of 1934) and 24.4% (473 of 1934) of the articles, respectively. A female first author was associated with more female last authors (36% vs 20%, P < .001), total female authors (2.9 vs 1.2, P < .001), and departments (3.3 vs 3.0, P < .001). Similarly, a female last author was associated with more female first authors (44% vs 26%, P = .001), total female authors (3.1 vs 1.2, P < .001), departments (3.5 vs 3.0 P < .001), and institutions (2.3 vs 1.9, P = .006). Each additional female author increased the mean number of institutions by 0.33 and departments by 0.46 on linear regression. First- or last-author gender was not associated with total authors ( P = .17).
Conclusions
Original research articles published with a female first or last author were associated with more departments and institutions, but not with the total number of authors, suggesting that women engage in some metrics of more collaborative research.
Introduction
Women are under-represented in radiology despite near-equal medical school graduation rates . Improving diversity is an avowed goal of the American College of Radiology, but there is little objective research on the implications of gender inequality specifically for radiology . Extrapolations can be made from the social sciences literature, which has demonstrated multiple benefits of more diverse teams and organizations. Female team members have been shown to increase a team’s collective intelligence beyond the average of the individual team members or even the smartest team member . Women have been shown to improve group communications, group processes, and overall collaborations . Multiple studies have, in turn, demonstrated that compared to individual research efforts, collaborative teams produce a greater number of research publications that yield more frequent citations and higher impact . Radiology is very different from the corporate world and distinct from the other scientific fields in which the benefits of diversity have been tested, and so it is important to test whether these benefits also apply to radiology.
Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to determine if female radiology researchers were more collaborative than their male counterparts in research articles published in major radiology journals.
Methods
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Results
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 1
Distribution of Variables Among Research Articles From January 2011 to December 2015
Variable_n_ (%)/Mean ± SD Total 1934 (100) Journal_American Journal of Roentgenology_ 889 (46)Radiology 552 (29)Academic Radiology 493 (25) First-author gender Male 1349 (70) Female 585 (30) Last-author gender Male 1461 (76) Female 473 (24) Female first and last authors 210 (11) Mean number of female authors 1.7 ± 1.7 Mean number of authors 6.0 ± 2.8 Mean percentage of female authors 28% (95% CI: 27%–29%) Mean number of departments 3.1 ± 2.1 Mean number of institutions 2.0 ± 1.7
CI, confidence interval; SD, standard deviation.
TABLE 2
Distribution of Variables Based on First-author Gender
Variables Male First Author Female First Author_P_ Value Mean number of authors 6.0 ± 2.9 6.1 ± 2.6 .17 Percentage of female last authors (%) 20 36 <.001 Mean number of female authors 1.2 ± 1.3 2.9 ± 1.8 <.001 Mean number of departments 3.0 ± 2.0 3.3 ± 2.4 <.001 Mean number of institutions 2.0 ± 1.5 2.3 ± 2.0 .20
P values refer to the results of the nominal logistic regression.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 3
Distribution of Variables Based on Last-author Gender
Variables Male Last Author Female Last Author_P_ Value Mean number of authors 6.0 ± 2.8 6.2 ± 2.8 .17 Percentage of female last authors (%) 20 36 .001 Mean number of female authors 1.2 ± 1.3 3.1 ± 1.9 <.001 Mean number of departments 3.0 ± 2.0 3.4 ± 2.5 <.001 Mean number of institutions 1.9 ± 1.5 2.3 ± 2.1 .006
P values refer to the results of the nominal logistic regression.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Discussion
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
References
1. Brotherton S.E., Etzel S.I.: Graduate medical education, 2010–2011. JAMA 2011; 306: pp. 1015-1030.
2. Hewett L., Lewis M., Collins H., et. al.: Gender bias in diagnostic radiology resident selection, does it exist?. Acad Radiol 2016; 23: pp. 101-107.
3. Grimm L.J., Ngo J., Pisano E.D., et. al.: Men (and Women) in academic radiology: how can we reduce the gender discrepancy?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206: pp. 678-680.
4. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) : Graduate medical education data resource book. Available at www.acgme.org/acgmeweb/tabid/259/Publications/GraduateMedicalEducationDataResourceBook.aspx
5. Forman H.P., Larson D.B., Kaye A.D., et. al.: Masters of radiology panel discussion: women in radiology–how can we encourage more women to join the field and become leaders?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 198: pp. 145-149.
6. Macura K.J.: Embracing Diversity.ACR Bulletin.2017.American College of Radiology
7. Bear J.B., Woolley A.W.: The role of gender in team collaboration and performance. Interdiscip Sci Rev 2011; 36: pp. 146-153.
8. Woolley A.W., Chabris C.F., Pentland A., et. al.: Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 2010; 330: pp. 686-688.
9. Abramo G., D’Angelo C.A., Murgia G.: Gender differences in research collaboration. J Informetrics 2013; 7: pp. 811-822.
10. Zeng X.H., Duch J., Sales-Pardo M., et. al.: Differences in collaboration patterns across discipline, career stage, and gender. PLoS Biol 2016; 14: e1002573
11. Lee S., Bozeman B.: The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc Stud Sci 2005; 35: pp. 632-702.
12. Wuchty S., Jones B.F., Uzzi B.: The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 2007; 316: pp. 1036-1039.
13. Cater S.W., Yoon S.C., Lowell D.A., et. al.: Bridging the gap: identifying global trends in gender disparity among the radiology physician workforce. Acad Radiol 2018; [ePuB ahead of print]
14. Chow D.S., Ha R., Filippi C.G.: Increased rates of authorship in radiology publications: a bibliometric analysis of 142,576 articles published worldwide by radiologists between 1991 and 2012. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204: pp. W52-W57.
15. Piper C.L., Scheel J.R., Lee C.I., et. al.: Gender trends in radiology authorship: a 35-year analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206: pp. 3-7.
16. Yun E.J., Yoon D.Y., Kim B., et. al.: Closing the gender gap: increased female authorship in AJR and radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: pp. 237-241.
17. Bluth E.I., Bansal S., Macura K.J., et. al.: Gender and the radiology workforce: results of the 2014 ACR workforce survey. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12: pp. 155-157.
18. Grimm L.J., Shapiro L.M., Singhapricha T., et. al.: Predictors of an academic career on radiology residency applications. Acad Radiol 2014; 21: pp. 685-690.
19. Grimm L.J., Lowell D.A., Cater S.W., et. al.: Differential motivations for pursuing diagnostic radiology by gender: implications for residency recruitment. Acad Radiol 2017; 24: pp. 1312-1317.