Gender Differences in Hepatology Medical Literature.

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that gender differences in academic medicine exist. Men frequently have better measures of performance such as number of publications, number of citations, remuneration, and funding. AIMS: To evaluate whether a gender disparity in authorship exists. METHODS: We recorded the gender of first and senior authors of original papers, editorials/reviews from liver-related manuscripts in Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Transplantation, American Journal of Gastroenterology, and Liver Transplantation from January 2014 to 2016. RESULTS: Of 2424 articles reviewed, we excluded 232 (10%) due to inability to determine gender. Among papers analyzed, 72.0% were original and 28.1% reviews/editorials with 65.1% of first authors being male and 34.9% female. Only 20.3% of papers with multiple authors had a female senior author. The proportion of male first and senior authorship between original papers and reviews/editorials was comparable. 72% of original papers had a male as first or senior author, but only 28% females. 71% of review/editorial papers had a male as first or senior author, but only 29% females. When the senior author of an original paper was female, 47.1% of first authors were male and 52.9% female. When the senior author was male, 67.1% of first authors were male and 32.9% female (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant gender difference exists in Hepatology publications. Female authorship mirrors the percentage of female AASLD membership; however, female senior authorship remains disproportionate. In general, funding for male authors is greater. Fewer women are first authors when the senior author is male, highlighting the importance of female mentorship in Hepatology.

Hispanic Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis Have Decreased Access to Care Compared to Non-Hispanics.

Background and Aims: Hispanic patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) have reduced rates of biochemical response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) and increased risk of disease progression compared to non-Hispanic patients. In this study, we sought to identify differences in demographics, comorbidities, environmental risk factors and socioeconomic status between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients with PBC. Methods: In a case control study, we analyzed data from Hispanic (n=37 females and 1 male) and non-Hispanic (n=54 females and 4 males) patients with PBC seen at the University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital from January 1998 through January 2013. Data were obtained by filling out a questionnaire either via phone call, mail, or e-mail. Odds ratios were calculated to measure the association between exposure and outcomes. Results: Baseline demographics, environmental risk factors and comorbidities were similar between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients with PBC. Hispanic patients were less likely to be married and fewer Hispanics had education beyond high school level compared to non-Hispanics. Sixty four percent of Hispanic patients had a household income of less than $50000, compared to 19.5% of non-Hispanics. Fewer Hispanic patients with PBC had health insurance coverage compared to non-Hispanics (86.5% vs. 98.1%; odds ratio: 0.1, 95% confidence interval: 0-0.9). Conclusions: Differences in disease severity and response to therapy observed in prior studies could not be explained by environmental exposures. In addition to genetic variation, socioeconomic discrepancies (access to care) may further explain these differences.