Author Gender Inequality in Medical Imaging Journals and the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background Early reports show the unequal effect the COVID-19 pandemic might have on men versus women engaged in medical research. Purpose To investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on scientific publishing by female physicians in medical imaging. Materials and Methods We conducted a descriptive bibliometric analysis of first and last-author gender of papers submitted to the top 50 medical imaging journals from March to May 2020 (n=2480) compared to the same period of the year in 2018 (n=2238) and 2019 (n=2355). Manuscript title, date of submission, first and last name of first and last authors, journal impact factor and author country of provenance were recorded. The Gender-API software was used to determine author gender. Statistical analysis comprised Chi square tests and multivariable logistic regression. Results Percentages of female first- and last-authorship were 1172/3711 (31.6%) and 717/3711 (19.3%) in 2018- 2019 versus 725/2248 (32.3%) and 465/2248 (20.7%) in 2020 (p=0.61 and p=0.21 respectively), and of COVID-19-related papers 89/253 (35.2%) and 52/253 (20.6%) respectively. No associations were found between first and last author gender, year of publication and continent of provenance. First- and last-authorship of high-ranking papers was not in favor of North American females whatever the year: OR 0.79 (p=0.05) and OR 0.72 (p=0.02). Higher rates of female last-authorship of high-ranking papers were observed in Europe (p=0.003): OR 1.20 (p=0.21) in 2018-2019 multiplied by interaction term OR 1.52 (p=0.09) in 2020, and of female first-authorship of low-ranking papers in Asia: OR=1.38 [0.98-1.92] (p=0.06) in 2020. Female first- and last-authorship of COVID-19-related papers was overrepresented for lowest-rank papers (p=0.02 and p=0.01). Conclusion One in three first authors and one in five last authors were female in 2018-2019 and 2020. While the first 2020 lockdown did not diminish the quantity of female publications, the impact upon the quality was variable. See also the editorial by Robbins and Khosa.