Equity for women in science: the role of gatekeepers

Sugimoto and Larivière's unique scientometric approach gained recognition within medicine when they coauthored a bibliometric analysis on gender and authorship in The Lancet's 2019 theme issue on advancing women in science, medicine, and global health. [...]despite women being more than half of all medical and science undergraduates for many years, Sugimoto and Larivière estimate that very slow growth in women's representation among scientists in clinical medicine means gender parity in authorship will not be reached in that field before 2049. By contrast, women science leaders typically advance early career researchers, share credit, and lead gender diverse teams, which have higher scientific impact. An acknowledged limitation is the use of one aspect of social identity, gender, in the binary assignment available in current classification systems and they were unable in most cases to include race or ethnicity indicators except where national census data allowed. The simple recognition of the editorial process being a social one—involving judgement, priority setting, negotiation, inevitable bias, and all the other aspects that define human behaviour—gives rise to seeing how decisions about what to publish and which messages to showcase are the product of a social process in which diverse sets of individuals applying high standards of editorial quality and scientific excellence nevertheless deploy agency, make choices, and exercise privilege.

The State of Public Health Education and Science During and After the Fall of the Soviet Union: Achievements, Remaining Challenges, and Future Priorities.

Objectives: In the post-COVID-19 world, when the adequacy of public health workforce education is being critically re-evaluated, this study undertakes a historical analysis of how the educational and scientific field of public health developed during and after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. The study intends to historically contextualize public health education and science development in former Soviet Republics. It attempts to document achievements after gaining independence and identify remaining challenges that need to be addressed for advancing public health science and education in Former Soviet Union countries to better prepare them for future pandemics and address current health challenges of the nations. Methods: The study used a mixed-methods review approach combining both a literature review, information collection from the school's websites, and secondary analysis of the quantitative data available about scientific outputs-peer-reviewed articles. Results: During communist rule and after the fall of the Soviet Union, the main historical events seem to have shaped the public health field of former Soviet countries, which also determined its eventual evolution. The international efforts post-1991 were instrumental in shifting medically oriented conceptualization of public health toward Western approaches, albeit with variable progress. Also, while scientific output has been growing from 1996 to 2019, sub-regional differences remain prominent. Conclusion: The region seems to have matured enough that it might be time to start and facilitate regional cooperation of public health schools to advance the field of public health and research. Regional and country variabilities feature prominently in the volume and quality of scientific output and call for the immediate attention of national governments and international partners.