Dawit Wondimagegn, Cynthia Whitehead, Carrie Cartmill, Eloy Rodrigues, Antonia Correia, Tiago Salessi Lins, Manuel Joao Costa
{"title":"更快,更高,更强-一起?顶级医学教育期刊作者分布的文献计量分析","authors":"Dawit Wondimagegn, Cynthia Whitehead, Carrie Cartmill, Eloy Rodrigues, Antonia Correia, Tiago Salessi Lins, Manuel Joao Costa","doi":"10.1101/2022.03.29.22273128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Medical education and medical education research are growing industries that have become increasingly globalized. Recognition of the colonial foundations of medical education has led to a growing focus on issues of equity, absence, and marginalization. One area of absence that has been under-explored is that of published voices from low- and middle-income countries. We undertook a bibliometric analysis of five top medical education journals to determine which countries were absent and which countries were represented in prestigious first and last authorship positions. Methods: Web of Science was searched for all articles and reviews published between 2012 and 2018 within Academic Medicine, Medical Education, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Medical Teacher, and BMC Medical Education. Country of origin was identified for first and last author of each publication, and the number of publications originating from each country were counted. Results: Our analysis revealed a dominance of first and last authors from five countries: USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Australia. Authors from these five countries had first or last authored 74% of publications. Of the 195 countries in the world, 53% were not represented by a single publication. There was a slight increase in the percentage of publications from outside of these five countries from 22% in 2012 to 29% in 2018. Conclusion: The dominance of wealthy nations within spaces that claim to be international is a finding that requires attention. We draw upon analogies from modern Olympic sport and our own collaborative research process to show how academic publishing continues to be a colonized space that advantages those from wealthy and English-speaking countries.","PeriodicalId":501387,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Medical Education","volume":"108 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Faster, Higher, Stronger – Together? A bibliometric analysis of author distribution in top medical education journals\",\"authors\":\"Dawit Wondimagegn, Cynthia Whitehead, Carrie Cartmill, Eloy Rodrigues, Antonia Correia, Tiago Salessi Lins, Manuel Joao Costa\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2022.03.29.22273128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Medical education and medical education research are growing industries that have become increasingly globalized. Recognition of the colonial foundations of medical education has led to a growing focus on issues of equity, absence, and marginalization. One area of absence that has been under-explored is that of published voices from low- and middle-income countries. We undertook a bibliometric analysis of five top medical education journals to determine which countries were absent and which countries were represented in prestigious first and last authorship positions. Methods: Web of Science was searched for all articles and reviews published between 2012 and 2018 within Academic Medicine, Medical Education, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Medical Teacher, and BMC Medical Education. Country of origin was identified for first and last author of each publication, and the number of publications originating from each country were counted. Results: Our analysis revealed a dominance of first and last authors from five countries: USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Australia. Authors from these five countries had first or last authored 74% of publications. Of the 195 countries in the world, 53% were not represented by a single publication. There was a slight increase in the percentage of publications from outside of these five countries from 22% in 2012 to 29% in 2018. Conclusion: The dominance of wealthy nations within spaces that claim to be international is a finding that requires attention. We draw upon analogies from modern Olympic sport and our own collaborative research process to show how academic publishing continues to be a colonized space that advantages those from wealthy and English-speaking countries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"108 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.29.22273128\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.29.22273128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
医学教育和医学教育研究是日益全球化的新兴产业。认识到医学教育的殖民基础导致了对公平、缺席和边缘化问题的日益关注。尚未得到充分探索的一个缺失领域是低收入和中等收入国家发表的声音。我们对五个顶级医学教育期刊进行了文献计量分析,以确定哪些国家缺席,哪些国家在著名的第一作者和最后作者位置上有代表性。方法:在Web of Science检索2012年至2018年间发表在学术医学、医学教育、健康科学教育进展、医学教师和BMC医学教育中的所有文章和评论。确定了每一出版物的第一和最后作者的原产国,并计算了来自每个国家的出版物的数量。结果:我们的分析显示第一作者和最后作者主要来自五个国家:美国、加拿大、英国、荷兰和澳大利亚。来自这五个国家的作者是74%出版物的第一作者或最后作者。在世界195个国家中,53%的国家没有一份出版物。来自这五个国家以外的出版物的百分比从2012年的22%略微增加到2018年的29%。结论:富裕国家在声称国际化的空间中占据主导地位是一个需要关注的发现。我们从现代奥林匹克运动和我们自己的合作研究过程中得出类比,以表明学术出版如何继续成为一个殖民空间,有利于那些来自富裕和英语国家的人。
Faster, Higher, Stronger – Together? A bibliometric analysis of author distribution in top medical education journals
Introduction: Medical education and medical education research are growing industries that have become increasingly globalized. Recognition of the colonial foundations of medical education has led to a growing focus on issues of equity, absence, and marginalization. One area of absence that has been under-explored is that of published voices from low- and middle-income countries. We undertook a bibliometric analysis of five top medical education journals to determine which countries were absent and which countries were represented in prestigious first and last authorship positions. Methods: Web of Science was searched for all articles and reviews published between 2012 and 2018 within Academic Medicine, Medical Education, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Medical Teacher, and BMC Medical Education. Country of origin was identified for first and last author of each publication, and the number of publications originating from each country were counted. Results: Our analysis revealed a dominance of first and last authors from five countries: USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Australia. Authors from these five countries had first or last authored 74% of publications. Of the 195 countries in the world, 53% were not represented by a single publication. There was a slight increase in the percentage of publications from outside of these five countries from 22% in 2012 to 29% in 2018. Conclusion: The dominance of wealthy nations within spaces that claim to be international is a finding that requires attention. We draw upon analogies from modern Olympic sport and our own collaborative research process to show how academic publishing continues to be a colonized space that advantages those from wealthy and English-speaking countries.