PD49-02 GENDER AND INVITED AUTHORSHIP IN THE JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyPediatrics: Health Services & Population Research (PD49)1 Apr 2019PD49-02 GENDER AND INVITED AUTHORSHIP IN THE JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY Jennifer Ahn, Margarett Shnorhavorian, Shannon Cannon*, Kathleen Kieran, and Paul Merguerian Jennifer AhnJennifer Ahn More articles by this author , Margarett ShnorhavorianMargarett Shnorhavorian More articles by this author , Shannon Cannon*Shannon Cannon* More articles by this author , Kathleen KieranKathleen Kieran More articles by this author , and Paul MerguerianPaul Merguerian More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000556865.22929.2cAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Publications in academic journals have been associated with promotion and career advancement. In many specialties, women have been underrepresented as authors and editors in journals. To our knowledge, this has not yet been examined in the subspecialty Pediatric Urology, in which females comprise about half of the current fellowship graduates. Our objective was to evaluate the role of gender in invited authorship and editorial positions in the Journal of Pediatric Urology. We hypothesized that women’s roles have increased over time, but that women are underrepresented as compared with professional society membership. METHODS: We examined all issues of the Journal of Pediatric Urology from 2005 to August 2018, recording editorial board members and first and senior authors for all editorials and invited commentaries. Gender and country of institution were also recorded for each individual. The same was done for the 2017 Societies for Pediatric Urology membership. For unknown authors, we visited institutional websites and used internet search engines to determine gender. Descriptive statistics were performed, along with Cochran-Armitage trend test and chi squared test, with a p value <0.05 considered significant. All analyses were performed with STATA 14. RESULTS: A total of 143 editorials and 162 invited commentaries were identified within the study period, with numbers increasing each year. Overall, these publications had 448 first and senior authorships, of which 49 (11%) were female. The 448 authorships represented 177 discrete authors with 23 (13%) being female. Of the 898 board positions over the study period, only 7.0% were held by females. The proportion of female authorships increased over time (p = 0.007), while the proportion of board positions did not (p=0.278), Figure 1. In 2017, SPU membership was 16.9% female, while invited authorship from Canada and the US was 13.7% female (p = 0.137). Only 11.7% of the Canadian or US editorial board members were female during that year (p=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Female invited authorship has increased over the past 13 years in the Journal of Pediatric Urology, nearly reflecting SPU membership in 2017. However, editorial board membership has lagged, indicating an opportunity for change. Source of Funding: none Seattle, WA© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 201Issue Supplement 4April 2019Page: e905-e906 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Jennifer Ahn More articles by this author Margarett Shnorhavorian More articles by this author Shannon Cannon* More articles by this author Kathleen Kieran More articles by this author Paul Merguerian More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".