From the Department of Ophthalmology, Antwerp University Hospital (UZA) (M.J.-G., D.C.D., S.H., I.I., S.N.D., C.K., J.J.R.), Edegem, Belgium; Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp (M.J.-G., D.C.D., S.H., I.I., S.N.D., C.K., J.J.R.), Antwerp, Belgium.
Department of Ophthalmology, Molière Longchamp Hospital (H.B.), Brussels, Belgium; Brussels Eye Doctors (H.B.), Brussels, Belgium.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2022 Aug;240:115-124. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2022.02.017. Epub 2022 Feb 25.
To investigate the gender gap in first/last authors in vision science and whether gender affects manuscript review times.
Observational retrospective database study.
First/last author's gender and country were assigned to 30 438 PubMed records (data derived from Q1-Q2 Ophthalmology journals for 2016-2020). Using mixed models, the influence of First Author Female (FAF) and Last Author Female (LAF) were evaluated on the manuscripts' review timeline. This analysis was performed globally and in predefined subgroups (English names, Asian names, specific topics). Additionally, the gender GAP was explored by country, journal, and research topics.
The percentages of FAF/LAF were unevenly distributed by country; in the top 30 ophthalmology journals, FAF accounted for 40.0%±6.7% of the publications whereas LAF accounted for 27.1%±4.9%. Overall, FAF/LAF papers underwent significantly longer times to be reviewed (up to +10 days) and accepted (+5 days). These differences persisted when only English names-easily recognizable worldwide-were considered, but not for Asian names. Delays >1 month to get published were found for FAF in 3 of 4 topics analyzed (eg, amblyopia).
Significant differences were found in both review and acceptance times for FAF or LAF papers. The causes for this are likely multifactorial and could be explained by a combination of gender bias and by women's concerns with being held to higher standards, something that has been previously documented, thereby perhaps delaying the rebuttal to reviewers. Increased awareness of this source of potential bias may assist in the implementation of preventive and corrective measures.
调查视觉科学领域第一/最后作者中的性别差距，以及性别是否会影响稿件评审时间。
观察性回顾性数据库研究。
将第一/最后作者的性别和国家分配给 30438 篇 PubMed 记录（数据来自 2016-2020 年 Q1-Q2 眼科期刊）。使用混合模型，评估第一作者女性（FAF）和最后作者女性（LAF）对稿件评审时间线的影响。这项分析在全球范围内以及在预先设定的亚组（英文姓名、亚洲姓名、特定主题）中进行。此外，还通过国家、期刊和研究主题探讨了性别差距。
按国家分布，FAF/LAF 的比例分布不均；在前 30 名眼科期刊中，FAF 占出版物的 40.0%±6.7%，而 LAF 占 27.1%±4.9%。总体而言，FAF/LAF 论文的评审和接受时间明显延长（最多延长 10 天）。当仅考虑易于在全球范围内识别的英文姓名时，这些差异仍然存在，但对于亚洲姓名则不然。在分析的 4 个主题中的 3 个主题中（例如弱视），发现 FAF 发表时间延迟超过 1 个月。
在 FAF 或 LAF 论文的评审和接受时间方面都存在显著差异。造成这种情况的原因可能是多方面的，可能是性别偏见和女性对更高标准的担忧的综合作用，这一点以前已经有记录，因此可能会延迟对审稿人的反驳。提高对这种潜在偏见来源的认识，可能有助于实施预防和纠正措施。
