A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10439-019-02222-3 below:

Authorship Trends Over the Past 30-Years in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering

References

  1. Adams, J. The fourth age of research. Nature 497:557–560, 2013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Angell, M. Publish or perish: a proposal. Ann. Intern. Med. 104:261–262, 1986.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Athanasiou, K. A. Passing the baton to the Davis editorial office. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38:1, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Beddoes, K., M. Borrego, and B. Jesiek. Mapping International Perspectives on Gender in Engineering Education Research. Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, 2009.

  5. Bhattacharyya, N., and N. L. Shapiro. Increased female authorship in Otolaryngology over the past three decades. Laryngoscope 110:358–361, 2000.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Borenstein, J. Responsible authorship in engineering fields: an overview of current ethical challenges. Sci. Eng. Ethics 17:355–364, 2011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Borenstein, J., and A. E. Shamoo. Rethinking authorship in the era of collaborative research. Account Res. 22:267–283, 2015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brinker, A. R., J. L. Liao, K. R. Kraus, J. Young, M. Sandelski, C. Mikesell, D. Robinson, M. Adjei, S. D. Lunsford, J. Fischer, M. A. Kacena, E. C. Whipple, and R. T. Loder. Bibliometric analysis of gender authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over 30 years of Spine 1985 to 2015. Spine 43:E849–E854, 2018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Budden, A. E., T. Tregenza, L. W. Aarssen, J. Koricheva, R. Leimu, and C. J. Lortie. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23:4–6, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chesler, N. C., G. Barabino, S. N. Bhatia, and R. Richards-Kortum. The pipeline still leaks and more than you think: a status report on gender diversity in biomedical engineering. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38:1928–1935, 2010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Clement, T. Authorship Matrix: a rational approach to quantify individual contributions and responsibilities in multi-author scientific articles. Sci. Eng. Ethics 20:345–361, 2014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Commonwealth of Australia. Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Going blind to see more clearly. 2017. https://www.pmc.gov.au/news-centre/domestic-policy/beta-report-going-blind-see-more-clearly. Accessed August 5, 2018.

  13. Darling, E. S. Use of double-blind peer review to increase author diversity. Conserv. Biol. 29:297–299, 2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dickersin, K., L. Fredman, K. M. Flegal, J. D. Scott, and B. Crawley. Is there a sex bias in choosing editors? Epidemiology journals as an example. JAMA 280:260–264, 1998.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Duma, S. (ed.). Annals of Biomedical Engineering: Biomedical Engineering Society. New York: Springer, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Filardo, G., B. da Graca, D. M. Sass, B. D. Pollock, E. B. Smith, and M. A. Martinez. Trends and comparison of female first authorship in high impact medical journals: observational study (1994–2014). BMJ 352:i847, 2016.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Fischer, J. P., A. E. Wininger, D. C. Scofield, A. Tucker, E. J. Kacena-Merrell, E. C. Whipple, M. A. Kacena, and R. T. Loder. Historical analysis of bibliometric trends in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics with a particular focus on sex. J. Pediatr. Orthop. 38:e168–e171, 2018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fishman, M., W. A. Williams, II, D. M. Goodman, and L. F. Ross. Gender differences in the authorship of original research in pediatric journals, 2001–2016. J. Pediatr. 191:244–249, 2017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fong, E. A., and A. W. Wilhite. Authorship and citation manipulation in academic research. PLoS ONE 12:e0187394, 2017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Freeman, R., and W. Huang. Strength in diversity. Nature 513:305, 2014.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Garvalov, B. K. Who stands to lose from double-blind review? Nature 452:28, 2008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gaule, P., and M. Piacentini. Chinese graduate students and U.S. scientific productivity. Rev. Econ. Stat. 95:698–701, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Goldin, C. The Gender Gap. The Concise Encyclopaedia of Economics. Indianapolis: Library of Economics and Liberty, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gu, A., N. Almeida, J. S. Cohen, K. M. Peck, and G. A. Merrell. Progression of authorship of scientific articles in The Journal of Hand Surgery, 1985–2015. J. Hand Surg. Am. 42:291.e1–291.e6, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gumpertz, M., R. Durodoye, E. Griffith, and A. Wilson. Retention and promotion of women and underrepresented minority faculty in science and engineering at four large land grant institutions. PLoS ONE 12:e0187285, 2017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Gutierrez, C., M. Paulosky, A. Aguinaldo, and J. Gerhart. Women break an engineering barrier: while other engineering disciplines stumble, BME represents a success story in attracting American women to a male-dominated field. IEEE Pulse 8:49–53, 2017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Halperin, E. Publish or perish—and bankrupt the medical library while we’re at it. Acad. Med. 74:470–472, 1999.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Holman, L., D. Stuart-Fox, and C. E. Hauser. The gender gap in science: how long until women are equally represented? PLoS Biol. 16:e2004956, 2018.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Hunt, V., L. Yee, S. Prince, and S. Dixon-Fyle. Delivering Through Diversity. McKinsey & Company, 2018. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/delivering-through-diversity. Accessed November 18, 2018.

  30. Jagsi, R., E. A. Guancial, C. C. Worobey, L. E. Henault, Y. Chang, R. Starr, N. J. Tarbell, and E. M. Hylek. The “gender gap” in authorship of academic medical literature—a 35-year perspective. N. Engl. J. Med. 355:281–287, 2006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kassis, T. How do research faculty in the biosciences evaluate paper authorship criteria? PLoS ONE 12:e0183632, 2017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Khan, F., M. M. Sandelski, J. D. Rytlewski, J. Lamb, C. Pedro, M. B. N. Adjei, S. Lunsford, J. P. Fischer, A. E. Wininger, E. C. Whipple, R. T. Loder, and M. A. Kacena. Bibliometric analysis of authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over the past three decades of Bone’s publication history. Bone 107:27–35, 2018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Link, A. M. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA 280:246–247, 1998.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. McGregor, C., K. P. Smith, and J. Percival. Women in biomedical engineering and health informatics and its impact on gender representation for accepted publications at IEEE EMBC 2007. In: Conference Proceedings of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2008. pp 2881–2884.

  35. McNutt, M. K., M. Bradford, J. M. Drazen, B. Hanson, B. Howard, K. H. Jamieson, V. Kiermer, E. Marcus, B. K. Pope, R. Schekman, S. Swaminathan, P. J. Stang, and I. M. Verma. Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115:2557–2560, 2018.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Mimouni, M., S. Zayit-Soudry, O. Segal, Y. Barak, A. Y. Nemet, S. Shulman, and N. Geffen. Trends in authorship of articles in major ophthalmology journals by gender, 2002–2014. Ophthalmology 123:1824–1828, 2016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. National Science Foundation. Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2015. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 17-306, 2017.

  38. Neill, U. Publish or perish, but at what cost? J. Clin. Invest. 118:2368, 2008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Parish, A. J., K. W. Boyack, and J. P. A. Ioannidis. Dynamics of co-authorship and productivity across different fields of scientific research. PLoS ONE 13:e0189742, 2018.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Powell, K. These labs are remarkably diverse—here’s why they’re winning at science. Nature 558:19–22, 2018.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Riesenberg, D., and G. D. Lundberg. The order of authorship: who’s on first? JAMA 264:1857, 1990.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Russell, A. F., R. T. Loder, A. S. Gudeman, P. Bolaji, P. Virtanen, E. C. Whipple, and M. A. Kacena. A bibliometric study of authorship and collaboration trends over the past 30 years in four major musculoskeletal science journals. Calcif. Tissue Int. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-018-0492-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Russell, A. F., M. Nguyen, M. Bhuiya, E. F. Likine, J. P. Fischer, K. Grassel, M. Groswald, R. Kabir, S. Spagna, S. Wright, E. C. Whipple, M. A. Kacena, and R. T. Loder. Comparative analysis of bibliometric, authorship, and collaboration trends over the past 30-year publication history of the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma and Injury. J. Orthop. Trauma 32:e327–e333, 2018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sax, L. Why gender matters, revised and updated: what parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York: Crown Publishing, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Shapiro, D. W., N. S. Wenger, and M. F. Shapiro. The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers. JAMA 271:438–442, 1994.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Singh, C. D. Huge peer-review study reveals lack of women and non-westerners. Nature 561(7723):295–296, 2018.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. The World Bank. World development indicators: Population, female (% of total), 2017. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL.FE.ZS. Accessed November 28, 2018.

  48. Webb, T. J., B. O’Hara, and R. P. Freckleton. Does double-blind review benefit female authors? Trends Ecol. Evol. 23:351–353, 2008; ((author reply 353–4)).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Wininger, A. E., J. P. Fischer, E. F. Likine, A. S. Gudeman, A. R. Brinker, J. Ryu, K. A. Maupin, S. Lunsford, E. C. Whipple, R. T. Loder, and M. A. Kacena. Bibliometric analysis of female authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over JBMR’s 30-year history. J. Bone Miner. Res. 32:2405–2414, 2017.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Yoder, B. Engineering by the Numbers. New Orleans: American Society for Engineering Education, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4