Shiwlani Sheena, Kirshan Kumar Sanjay, Rahaman Zubair, Mohammed Yaqub Nadeem, Lohana Abhi C, Gulati Amit, Khurana Sakshi
Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA.
Gastroenterolgy, Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation, Karachi, PAK.
Cureus. 2024 Apr 3;16(4):e57528. doi: 10.7759/cureus.57528. eCollection 2024 Apr.
In critical care medicine, research trials serve as crucial avenues for disseminating knowledge, influencing clinical practices, and fostering innovation. Notably, a significant gender imbalance exists within this field, potentially mirrored in the authorship of critical care research. This study aimed to investigate an exploration to ascertain the presence and extent of female representation in first and senior authorship roles within critical care literature. To this end, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases for original articles published up to February 2024, coupled with a methodological quality assessment via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and statistical analyses through Review Manager software (RevMan, version 5.4.1, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020). The study's findings, distilled from seven studies included in the final analysis, reveal a pronounced gender disparity. Specifically, in critical care literature examining mixed populations, female first authors were significantly less common than their male counterparts, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.25 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.18-5.68; p < 0.00001). Conversely, pediatric critical care studies did not show a significant difference in gender distribution among first authors (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.31-6.10; p = 0.68). The investigation also highlighted a stark underrepresentation of female senior authors in critical care research across both mixed (OR: 11.67; 95% CI: 7.76-17.56; p < 0.00001) and pediatric populations (OR: 5.41; 95% CI: 1.88-15.56; p = 0.002). These findings underscore the persistent underrepresentation of women in critical care literature authorship and their slow progression into leadership roles, as evidenced by the disproportionately low number of female senior authors.
在重症医学中,研究试验是传播知识、影响临床实践和促进创新的关键途径。值得注意的是,该领域存在显著的性别失衡现象,这可能反映在重症医学研究的作者身份上。本研究旨在调查重症医学文献中第一作者和资深作者角色中女性代表的存在情况和程度。为此,我们在PubMed、谷歌学术和科学网数据库中进行了系统检索,以查找截至2024年2月发表的原创文章,并通过纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)进行方法学质量评估,以及通过Review Manager软件(RevMan,版本5.4.1,Cochrane协作网,2020)进行统计分析。从最终分析中纳入的七项研究得出的结果显示出明显的性别差异。具体而言,在研究混合人群的重症医学文献中,女性第一作者的比例明显低于男性,优势比(OR)为4.25(95%置信区间(CI):3.18 - 5.68;p < 0.00001)。相反,儿科重症医学研究在第一作者的性别分布上没有显示出显著差异(OR:1.37;95% CI:0.31 - 6.10;p = 0.68)。该调查还突出表明,在混合人群(OR:11.67;95% CI:7.76 - 17.56;p < 0.00001)和儿科人群(OR:5.41;95% CI:1.88 - 15.56;p = 0.002)的重症医学研究中,女性资深作者的代表性严重不足。这些发现强调了女性在重症医学文献作者身份中的代表性持续不足,以及她们在进入领导角色方面进展缓慢,女性资深作者数量极低就是证明。