The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages.

AMRC open research Pub Date : 2022-08-10 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.12688/amrcopenres.13072.1
Melina Andreou, Narshil Choi, Jorge Gómez Magenti, Susan Kohlhaas, Rosa Sancho
{"title":"The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages.","authors":"Melina Andreou, Narshil Choi, Jorge Gómez Magenti, Susan Kohlhaas, Rosa Sancho","doi":"10.12688/amrcopenres.13072.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Multiple studies have analysed gender disparities in academic research. Here we study the gender composition of the dementia research field at different stages in the career pipeline.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We use various data sources to gain insights about the gender ratio across career stages: conference attendance data as a proxy for the field as a whole; bibliometric data to know who publishes, and who occupies positions of seniority among the listed authors; and Alzheimer's Research UK's (ARUK) internal grant funding data to understand who obtains funding. We also analyse the scoring of grant applications based on the gender of the reviewers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results confirm that female researchers leave dementia academic research at higher rates than men, before transitioning into senior positions. In 2020, they comprised over 60% of the field, produced 54% of first authorships, but only accounted for 38% of last authorships. Overall, women received 37% of ARUK's competitive grants, with significant differences between grant schemes awarded for early career researchers (64% female awardees) compared to grant schemes aimed at senior researchers (33% female awardees). Men and women applied for and obtained grants at significantly different rates depending on the career stage at which the grant was aimed.Finally, we also observed that male and female reviewers apply evaluation criteria differently, with men giving better scores than women on average.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study adds to the evidence that shows that women get published less, receive less funding, and transition into senior academic positions at disproportionally lower rates than men do. We briefly discuss potential reasons why gender disparities arise as researchers progress into senior positions, and offer interventions ARUK can implement in its application and evaluation process to address those disparities.</p>","PeriodicalId":72183,"journal":{"name":"AMRC open research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11064979/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMRC open research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/amrcopenres.13072.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Multiple studies have analysed gender disparities in academic research. Here we study the gender composition of the dementia research field at different stages in the career pipeline.

Methods: We use various data sources to gain insights about the gender ratio across career stages: conference attendance data as a proxy for the field as a whole; bibliometric data to know who publishes, and who occupies positions of seniority among the listed authors; and Alzheimer's Research UK's (ARUK) internal grant funding data to understand who obtains funding. We also analyse the scoring of grant applications based on the gender of the reviewers.

Results: Our results confirm that female researchers leave dementia academic research at higher rates than men, before transitioning into senior positions. In 2020, they comprised over 60% of the field, produced 54% of first authorships, but only accounted for 38% of last authorships. Overall, women received 37% of ARUK's competitive grants, with significant differences between grant schemes awarded for early career researchers (64% female awardees) compared to grant schemes aimed at senior researchers (33% female awardees). Men and women applied for and obtained grants at significantly different rates depending on the career stage at which the grant was aimed.Finally, we also observed that male and female reviewers apply evaluation criteria differently, with men giving better scores than women on average.

Conclusions: Our study adds to the evidence that shows that women get published less, receive less funding, and transition into senior academic positions at disproportionally lower rates than men do. We briefly discuss potential reasons why gender disparities arise as researchers progress into senior positions, and offer interventions ARUK can implement in its application and evaluation process to address those disparities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
痴呆症研究的职业管道:不同职业阶段发表论文作者和资助结果的性别差异
背景:多项研究分析了学术研究中的性别差异。在这里,我们研究了痴呆症研究领域在职业生涯不同阶段的性别构成。方法:我们使用各种数据来源来深入了解不同职业阶段的性别比例:会议出席率数据作为整个领域的代表;文献计量数据,以了解谁发表,谁在列出的作者中占据的地位;以及英国阿尔茨海默病研究中心(ARUK)的内部资助数据,以了解谁获得了资助。我们还分析了基于审稿人性别的拨款申请评分。结果:我们的研究结果证实,在进入高级职位之前,女性研究人员离开痴呆症学术研究的比例高于男性。到2020年,他们占该领域的60%以上,占第一作者的54%,但只占最后作者的38%。总体而言,女性获得了ARUK竞争性赠款的37%,与针对高级研究人员的赠款计划(33%女性获奖者)相比,授予早期职业研究人员的赠款计划(64%女性获奖者)存在显著差异。根据赠款所针对的职业阶段,男女申请和获得赠款的比率差别很大。最后,我们还观察到,男性和女性审稿人使用的评估标准不同,男性的平均得分高于女性。结论:我们的研究增加了证据,表明女性发表的论文较少,获得的资助较少,晋升高级学术职位的比例比男性低得多。我们简要讨论了研究人员晋升到高级职位时出现性别差异的潜在原因,并提供了ARUK可以在其应用和评估过程中实施的干预措施,以解决这些差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Creating connections: developing an online space for cross-regional mentorship and network building in the dementia research field. Inclusion of palliative and end of life care in health strategies aimed at integrated care: a documentary analysis [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on hospices: A systematic integrated review and synthesis of recommendations for policy and practice. Inclusion of palliative and end of life care in health strategies aimed at integrated care: a documentary analysis [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1