Articles with women as primary or senior authors are cited less often and have lower Altmetric Attention Scores than papers written by men, according to an analysis of articles published in three major cardiology journals. The research letter, published online Monday and in the Aug. 8 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, investigated potential differences in the number of citations or Altmetric scores of research publications in high-impact cardiology journals on the basis of author gender. Led by Kristen N. Brown, MD, from the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, the team noted that academics in all specialties strive to publish work in the highest-impact journals and to have the greatest impact of their published work – adding that publications in journals with higher impact factors increase the authors’ merit and are also used by academic institutions as a measure toward promotion within their specialty. Indeed, Brown and colleagues noted that measures of an author’s written impact historically have been based on the number of times an individual’s work has been cited, but that a newer measure of impact is the AAS, which is a weighted score of an author’s scholarly work on the basis of how much online attention an individual article receives. “These significant associations among gender, publication quantity, citations, and AAS provide more insight into the ongoing gender disparity within cardiology,” said the team. “We suggest reform in the field of cardiology to include an institution of metrics for equitable authorship, standards for promotion, inclusive and equitable mentorship programs, a reduction in ‘MANuscripts’ (ie, men-only manuscripts), and an increase in women on research studies and trials.” Research details As part of an investigation for Women As One, Brown and colleagues collected data on articles published in the three leading cardiology journals between 2017 and 2019 that currently have the highest impact factors: the Journal of American College of Cardiology, the European Heart Journal, and JAMA Cardiology. Brown and colleagues reported that citations were statistically lower on original research articles in which women were the senior author when compared with citations of original research articles with men as senior author (29 [interquartile range – IQR: 17-53.5] citations vs 37 [IQR: 21-63] citations; P < 0.025), but there was no significant difference for primary author for women compared with men (34 [IQR: 20-56.25] citations vs 37 [IQR: 21-64] citations; P = 0.15) The analysis also showed no difference in citations between women and men when both primary and senior authors were of the same gender (32 [IQR: 19-62] citations vs 36 [IQR: 21-62] citations; P = 0.16). Furthermore, they reported that Altmetric scores were “significantly lower” for original research articles in which women were the primary authors compared with men (44 [IQR: 16-90] vs 49 [IQR: 23-97.75]; P < 0.025), but not when women were senior authors (42 [IQR: 19-100] vs 49 [IQR: 21-97]; P > 0.025) or when women were the primary and senior authors compared with men (38 [IQR: 14-95] vs 48 [IQR: 21- 97]; P > 0.025). “This work provides insight into the ongoing struggle women research authors face in the field of cardiology,” they said, urging that future research should focus on whether these differences contribute to delayed academic advancement of women cardiologists. Source: Brown KN, Goel R, Soman S, et al. Gender Disparity in Citations and Altmetric Attention Scores in High-Impact Cardiology Journals. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023;82:572-573. Image Credit: C Malambo/peopleimages.com – stock.adobe.com