Comparison of the contributions of female and male authors to medical research in 2000 and 2015: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

ObjectivesThe proportion of women engaged in clinical research has increased over time. However, it is unclear if women and men contribute to the same extent during the conduct of research and, if so, if they are equally rewarded by a strategic first or last author position. We aim to describe the prevalence of women authors of original articles published 15 years apart and to compare the research contributions and author positions according to gender.DesignRepeated cross-sectional study.SettingPublished original articles.Participants1910 authors of 223 original articles published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2000 and 2015.Primary and secondary outcomes measuresSelf-reported contributions to 10 aspects of the article (primary) and author position on the byline.ResultsThe proportion of women authors increased from 32% (n=243) to 41% (n=469) between 2000 and 2015 (p<0.0001). In 2000, women authors were less frequently involved than men in the conception and design (134 (55%) vs 323 (61%); p=0.0256), critical revision (171 (70%) vs 426 (81%); p=0.0009), final approval (196 (81%) vs 453 (86%); p=0.0381) and obtaining of funding (39 (16%) vs 114 (22%); p=0.0245). Women were more frequently involved than men in administration and logistics (85 (35%) vs 137 (26%); p=0.0188) and data collection (121 (50%) vs 242 (46%); p=0.0532), but they were similarly involved in the analysis and interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, provision of materials/patients and statistical expertise. Women were less often last authors than men (22 (9%) vs 82 (16%); p=0.0102). These gender differences persisted in 2015.ConclusionsThe representation of women among authors of medical articles increased notably between 2000 and 2015, but still remained below 50%. Women’s roles differed from those of men with no change over time.