Mapping current status and emerging trends in NETosis: A bibliometric study.

BACKGROUND: NETosis is a critical innate immune mechanism of neutrophils that contributes to the accelerated progression of autoimmune diseases, thrombosis, cancer, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed the relevant literature by bibliometric methods in order to provide a more comprehensive and objective view of the knowledge dynamics in the field. METHODS: The literature on NETosis was downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection, analyzed with VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Microsoft for co-authorship, co-occurrence, and co-citation analysis. RESULTS: In the field of NETosis, the United States was the most influential countries. Harvard University was the most active institutions. Mariana J. Kaplan and Brinkmann V were, respectively, the most prolific and most co-cited authors. Frontiers in Immunology, Journal of Immunology, Plos One, Blood, Science, Journal of Cell Biology, and Nature Medicine were the most influential journals. The top 15 keywords are associated with immunological and NETosis formation mechanisms. The keywords with the strongest burst detection were mainly related to COVID-19 (coronavirus, ACE2, SARS coronavirus, cytokine storm, pneumonia, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio), and cancer (circulating tumor cell). CONCLUSION: Research on NETosis is currently booming. The mechanism of NETosis and its role in innate immunity, autoimmune diseases, especially systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, and thrombosis are the focus of research in the field of NETosis. A future study will concentrate on the function of NETosis in COVID-19 and recurrent metastasis of cancer.

Overcoming the gender bias in ecology and evolution: is the double-anonymized peer review an effective pathway over time?

Male researchers dominate scientific production in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However, potential mechanisms to avoid this gender imbalance remain poorly explored in STEM, including ecology and evolution areas. In the last decades, changes in the peer-review process towards double-anonymized (DA) have increased among ecology and evolution (EcoEvo) journals. Using comprehensive data on articles from 18 selected EcoEvo journals with an impact factor >1, we tested the effect of the DA peer-review process in female-leading (i.e., first and senior authors) articles. We tested whether the representation of female-leading authors differs between double and single-anonymized (SA) peer-reviewed journals. Also, we tested if the adoption of the DA by previous SA journals has increased the representativeness of female-leading authors over time. We found that publications led by female authors did not differ between DA and SA journals. Moreover, female-leading articles did not increase after changes from SA to DA peer-review. Tackling female underrepresentation in science is a complex task requiring many interventions. Still, our results highlight that adopting the DA peer-review system alone could be insufficient in fostering gender equality in EcoEvo scientific publications. Ecologists and evolutionists understand how diversity is important to ecosystems' resilience in facing environmental changes. The question remaining is: why is it so difficult to promote and keep this "diversity" in addition to equity and inclusion in the academic environment? We thus argue that all scientists, mentors, and research centers must be engaged in promoting solutions to gender bias by fostering diversity, inclusion, and affirmative measures.

Outcomes of COVID-19 manuscripts submitted to the Canadian Journal of Anesthesia: a retrospective audit of author gender and person of colour status.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the representation of women and persons of colour (POC) authors of COVID-19 manuscripts submitted to, accepted in, and rejected from the Journal and to evaluate trends in their representation during the pandemic. METHODS: All COVID-19 manuscripts submitted to the Journal between 1 February 2020 and 30 April 2021 were included. Manuscript data were retrieved from Editorial Manager, and gender and POC status were obtained through: 1) e-mail communication with corresponding authors; 2) e-mail queries to other coauthors; 3) NamSor software, and 4) Internet searches. The data were described using percentages and summary statistics. A two-sample test of proportions was used for comparisons and trends were analyzed with linear regression. RESULTS: We identified 314 manuscripts (1,555 authors), 95 (461 authors) of which were accepted for publication. Of all authors, 515 (33%) were women, and women were the lead and senior authors of 101 (32%) and 69 (23%) manuscripts, respectively. There were no differences in women's representation as authors between accepted and rejected manuscripts. Overall, 923/1,555 (59%) authors were identified as POC, with a significantly lower proportion of POC authors among accepted vs rejected manuscripts (41%, 188/461 vs 67%, 735/1,094; difference, -26%; 95% CI, -32 to -21; P < 0.001). We did not observe significant trends in the proportion of women and POC authors over the study period. CONCLUSION: The proportion of women authors of COVID-19 manuscripts was lower than men's representation. Further research is required to determine the factors that account for the higher proportion of POC authors across rejected manuscripts.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avions pour objectif d'évaluer la représentation des femmes et des personnes de couleur ayant rédigé des manuscrits portant sur la COVID-19 soumis, acceptés et rejetés au Journal et d'évaluer les tendances concernant leur représentation pendant la pandémie. MéTHODE: Tous les manuscrits portant sur la COVID-19 soumis au Journal entre le 1er février 2020 et le 30 avril 2021 ont été inclus. Les données des manuscrits ont été extraites de la plateforme de gestion des manuscrits Editorial Manager, et le sexe et le statut de personne de couleur ont été obtenus par : 1) la communication par courrier électronique avec les auteurs et autrices correspondant·es; 2) des requêtes par courrier électronique envoyées à d'autres coautrices et coauteurs; 3) le logiciel NamSor, et 4) des recherches sur Internet. Les données ont été décrites à l'aide de pourcentages et de statistiques sommaires. Un test de proportions à deux échantillons a été utilisé pour les comparaisons et les tendances ont été analysées par régression linéaire. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié 314 manuscrits (1555 auteurs et autrices), dont 95 (461 autrices et auteurs) ont été acceptés pour publication. Parmi tou·tes les auteurs/autrices, 515 (33 %) étaient des femmes, et les femmes étaient les autrices principales et senior de 101 (32 %) et 69 (23 %) manuscrits, respectivement. Il n'y avait aucune différence dans la représentation des femmes en tant qu'autrices entre les manuscrits acceptés et rejetés. Dans l'ensemble, 923/1555 (59 %) auteurs et autrices ont été identifié·es comme étant des personnes de couleur, avec une proportion significativement plus faible d'autrices et d'auteurs de couleur parmi les manuscrits acceptés vs rejetés (41 %, 188/461 vs 67 %, 735/1094; différence, -26 %; IC 95 %, -32 à -21; P < 0,001). Nous n'avons pas observé de tendances significatives dans la proportion d'auteurs et d'autrices femmes et de couleur au cours de la période à l'étude. CONCLUSION: La proportion de femmes autrices de manuscrits sur la COVID-19 était inférieure à celle des hommes. D'autres recherches sont nécessaires pour déterminer les facteurs qui expliquent la plus grande proportion d'autrices et d'auteurs de couleur parmi les manuscrits rejetés.

Female authorship trends and the effect of COVID-19 on cataract and refractive surgery literature.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether gender barriers persist specifically in the cataract and refractive surgery (CRS) literature. In addition, no literature exists investigating the long-term effect of COVID-19 on female authorship in ophthalmology past 2020. SETTING: Scopus 2015 to 2022. DESIGN: Retrospective data review. METHODS: Articles published in the Journal of Refractive Surgery and the Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery were recorded from January 2015 to February 2022 from Scopus. Articles with only 1 author or where gender could not be identified were excluded. The first author (FA) gender, senior author (SA) gender, affiliated country, type of literature, and number of citations were collected. Pearson chi-squared tests with phi coefficients and multivariate logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: 3153 articles were included in analysis. There were 910 works with female FAs and 648 with female SAs. Gender did not predict publishing in one journal over the other (P > .050). Women made up less than 30% of authorship of all types of literature, except for prospective/observational studies as FA (31.3%). Compared with before 2020, female FAs from 2020 onward were associated with increased retrospective analysis (phi = 0.072, P = .030) and letters/editorials (phi = 0.134, P < .001) but decreased case reports (phi = 0.087, P = .009) and "others" (phi = -0.164, P < .001). Similar associations were observed for female SAs. Females were more likely to publish in Asian countries. Female SAs predicted an increased likelihood of female FAs (odds ratio, 1.401, 95% CI, 1.165-1.684, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparities exist in authorship of the CRS literature. COVID-19 has altered the types of literature published by women, but men still publish most of all types of CRS research.

Gender Inequalities in Publications about COVID-19 in Spain: Authorship and Sex-Disaggregated Data.

Gender inequalities in biomedical literature have been widely reported in authorship as well as the scarcity of results that are stratified by sex in the studies. We conducted a bibliometric review of articles on COVID-19 published in the main Spanish medical journals between April 2020 and May 2021. The purpose of this study was to analyse differences in authorship order and composition by sex and their evolution over time, as well as the frequency of sex-disaggregated empirical results and its relationship with the author sex in articles on COVID-19 in the main Spanish biomedical journals. We identified 914 articles and 4921 authors, 57.5% men and 42.5% women. Women accounted for 36.7% of first authors and for 33.7% of last authors. Monthly variation in authorship over the course of the pandemic indicates that women were always less likely to publish as first authors. Only 1.0% of the articles broke down empirical results by sex. Disaggregation of results by sex was significantly more frequent when women were first authors and when women were the majority in the authorship. It is important to make gender inequalities visible in scientific dissemination and to promote gender-sensitive research, which can help to reduce gender bias in clinical studies as well as to design public policies for post-pandemic recovery that are more gender-equitable.

Gender differences in COVID-19-related manuscript authorship by hospitalists during the pandemic: A bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hospital medicine (HM) has a well-described gender disparity related to academic work and promotion. During the COVID-19 pandemic, female authorship across medicine fell further behind historical averages. OBJECTIVE: Examine how COVID-19 affected the publication gender gap for hospitalists. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Bibliometric analysis to determine gender and specialty of US-based physician first and last authors of COVID-19 articles published March 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 in the four highest impact general medical journals and two highest impact HM-specific journals. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: We characterized the percentage of all physician authors that were women, the percentage of physician authors that were hospitalists, and the percentage of HM authors that were women. We compared author gender between general medical and HM-specific journals. RESULTS: During the study period, 853 manuscripts with US-based first or last authors were published in eligible journals. Included manuscripts contained 1124 US-based physician first or last author credits, of which 34.2% (384) were women and 8.8% (99) were hospitalists. Among hospitalist author credits, 43.4% (n = 43/99) were occupied by women. The relative gender equity for hospitalist authors was driven by the two HM journals where, compared to the four general medical journals, hospitalist authors (54.1% [33/61] vs. 26.3% [10/38] women, respectively, p = .002) and hospitalist last authors (51.9% [14/27] vs. 20% [4/20], p = .03) were more likely to be women. CONCLUSIONS: Across COVID-19-related manuscripts, disparities by gender were driven by the high-impact general medical journals. HM-specific journals had more equitable inclusion of women authors, demonstrating the potential impact of proactive editorial policies on diversity.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Manuscript Submission by Women to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had far-reaching consequences, occasionally amplifying preexisting disparities. This study examines the impact of COVID-19 on Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (PRS) manuscript submissions by female authors. METHODS: All manuscripts submitted to PRS during the months of March and April of 2018 through 2021 were examined. Gender of the first, corresponding, and senior authors was confirmed using Gender API; the country of the author was abstracted; and appropriate statistical comparisons were made. RESULTS: There were 2512 submissions to PRS during the study period, with a statistically significant increase observed between 2019 and 2020 ( P = 0.008). Despite this significant increase, the proportion of publications by female corresponding and senior authors decreased significantly with the onset of the pandemic ( P < 0.001 for both). This decrease was mirrored by a significant increase in the proportion of male senior and corresponding author publications ( P < 0.001 for both) and female first author publications ( P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a significant increase in overall submissions to PRS during the COVID-19 pandemic, the proportion submitted by senior and corresponding female authors declined. Although causality cannot be determined by the authors' methodology, their findings suggest a disproportionate burden on senior female authors during the pandemic with unclear academic repercussions.

Impact of COVID-19 on gender gap in dental publications: a retrospective cohort with three Brazilian journals.

This was a retrospective cohort study to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the gender gap in articles submitted to three international dental journals based in Brazil. All submissions performed to Brazilian Dental Journal, Brazilian Oral Research, and Journal of Applied Oral Science before (2019) and during the pandemic (2020) were assessed. Gender of the first, last, and corresponding authors were collected. Other variables collected were journal, continent studied by authors and stage of their careers (classified according to authors' highest degree), and final decision reached in the article. Absolute and relative frequencies with 95% confidence intervals, Pearson's Chi-square tests, and Fisher's Exact test were used (α = 0.05). In total, 4,726 unique submissions were analyzed. A higher proportion of early-career authors was observed during the pandemic (44.8% to 49.3%, p = 0.021). Most articles were rejected but without association with gender. Increased proportion of male first authors from before to during the pandemic was observed (39% to 42.1%, p = 0.034). Drop in the proportion of articles with women as first authors was observed for researchers in their early- (65.9% to 58.8%, p = 0.02) and mid-career stages (63% to 55.8%, p = 0.014). Reduction in women as first authors was observed during the pandemic in South and Central Americas (66.7% to 61.5%, p = 0.010), and when the last author was a female, or the corresponding author was a male. In conclusion, a disproportionate impact on female dental researchers in submitting articles in the period from before to during the pandemic was observed when considering first authorship, suggesting that the COVID-19 may have increased the gender inequality in dental science.

Impact of the Pandemic on Gender Differences in Scientific Publication Authorship Among Turkish Adult Cardiologists.

OBJECTIVE: Despite efforts spent on promotion of gender equity in the academia, the gender gap is feared to have widened after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Herein, we aimed to compare the distribution of female authorship by Turkish adult cardiologists in journals indexed at PubMed before and after the pandemic. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, an advanced search on PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) was carried out based on the following criteria: "entrez date" and keywords "Turkey" and "cardiology" to identify papers that entered the online database in April-September 2019 and April-September 2020. After the study sample was determined, type of the article and details of the author list were recorded. RESULTS: Of 1318 articles screened, 708 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 85 (12.0%) of first authors and 67 (10.0%) of senior authors were female. Females were less likely to first author original articles, editorials, case reports/series and papers with international participation (9.5%, P = .012; 33.3%, P = .045; 18.3%, P = .033; 4.8%, P = .032, respectively). A higher proportion of females were in first and corresponding author positions in original articles (73.2%, P = .032; 76.5%, P = .019, respectively), but not in other article types (all P > .05), after emergence of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: These suggest that significant gender differences exist with regard to authorships of scientific publications that were submitted by Turkish adult cardiologists. Future studies may aim to evaluate the trends across a wider time span and based on a more extensive scientific output follow-up.

Gender Gap in Scientific Publications on COVID-19 in Italy During the First Wave of the Pandemic: An Observational Study.

Background: Worldwide, concerns rise on how COVID-19 pandemic impacted heavily on women, even on those belonging to the scientific community. The Italian scientific production regarding the COVID-19 throughout the first months of the health emergency could help to understand the heft of female researchers in this unique period. Objectives: This study aims to investigate the gender gap in the scientific production on COVID-19 in Italy during the first months of the pandemic. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted and, for each included study, first and last author's gender, type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation, journal's Impact Factor (IF) and specialization were extracted. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed. Results: 22.2% of the articles were signed by a woman as first author, 18.1% as last authors. Female authorship was less frequent than male authorship regardless of the type of study, number of co-authors, type of affiliation and field of specialization. Conclusion: This analysis reveal a low prevalence of studies with a female first or last author and suggests that the low share of female authors publishing on COVID-19 during the considered timespan is a transversal issue throughout the Italian medical field.

Artificial intelligence solutions enabling sustainable agriculture: A bibliometric analysis.

There is a dearth of literature that provides a bibliometric analysis concerning the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in sustainable agriculture therefore this study attempts to fill this research gap and provides evidence from the studies conducted between 2000-2021 in this field of research. The study is a systematic bibliographic analysis of the 465 previous articles and reviews done between 2000-2021 in relation to the utilization of AI in sustainable methods of agriculture. The results of the study have been visualized and presented using the VOSviewer and Biblioshiny visualizer software. The results obtained post analysis indicate that, the amount of academic works published in the field of AI's role in enabling sustainable agriculture increased significantly from 2018. Therefore, there is conclusive evidence that the growth trajectory shows a significant climb upwards. Geographically analysed, the country collaboration network highlights that most number of studies in the realm of this study originate from China, USA, India, Iran, France. The co-author network analysis results represent that there are multi-disciplinary collaborations and interactions between prominent authors from United States of America, China, United Kingdom and Germany. The final framework provided from this bibliometric study will help future researchers identify the key areas of interest in research of AI and sustainable agriculture and narrow down on the countries where prominent academic work is published to explore co-authorship opportunities.

Gender equity in health research publishing in Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Women researchers find it more difficult to publish in academic journals than men, an inequity that affects women's careers and was exacerbated during the pandemic, particularly for women in low-income and middle-income countries. We measured publishing by sub-Saharan African (SSA) women in prestigious authorship positions (first or last author, or single author) during the time frame 2014-2016. We also examined policies and practices at journals publishing high rates of women scientists from sub-Saharan Africa, to identify potential structural enablers affecting these women in publishing. METHODS: The study used Namsor V.2, an application programming interface, to conduct a secondary analysis of a bibliometric database. We also analysed policies and practices of ten journals with the highest number of SSA women publishing in first authorship positions. RESULTS: Based on regional analyses, the greatest magnitude of authorship inequity is in papers from sub-Saharan Africa, where men comprised 61% of first authors, 65% of last authors and 66% of single authors. Women from South Africa and Nigeria had greater success in publishing than those from other SSA countries, though women represented at least 20% of last authors in 25 SSA countries. The journals that published the most SSA women as prominent authors are journals based in SSA. Journals with overwhelmingly male leadership are also among those publishing the highest number of SSA women. CONCLUSION: Women scholars in SSA face substantial gender inequities in publishing in prestigious authorship positions in academic journals, though there is a cadre of women research leaders across the region. Journals in SSA are important for local women scholars and the inequities SSA women researchers face are not necessarily attributable to gender discrepancy in journals' editorial leadership.