Women enroll in numbers that are virtually equal to men. In academic medicine, there are still considerable gender inequalities in rank and leadership, notwithstanding parity in medical school admissions. The progression of women in academia will be directly correlated to their success in obtaining the first authorship of original research articles, which measures the success for promotion in academics.
Some could question whether diverse authorship is essential. The prominence of minority groups and women presently underrepresented in medicine and research will bring fresh viewpoints that will broaden the area of study. Women conduct studies on gender inequality more frequently than men. Only 30% of the research primary investigators supported by the National Institutes of Health are women, and the European Research Commission also shows lower funding rates for female researchers. It should be a top priority to address the substantial loss of human capital brought on by women’s unequal contribution to research.
What to do to narrow down the gap in gender in publishing and research? Authorship is a requirement for job advancement and a sign of success; it results from career development, mentoring, financial support, and support. To combat gender inequality, journals, universities, and funding organizations must educate leaders about unconscious prejudice and create and execute institutional policies that support gender parity.
The impact of unconscious gender (and other) prejudices may be reduced if reviewers’ identities are concealed from authors, and this idea might be tested. The kind of subjects given precedence at particular journals may also be influenced by the genders of the editor-in-chief, other editors, and editorial board members.
The promises of the policy of gender parity at institutions and financial organizations significantly impact women’s professional success. Five steps can be recommended for universities, taking a cue from the social sciences: gender analysis in essential regions; incorporating gender fairness problems into working habits; creating promotion criteria; involving males in advocating for gender parity, and equally recognizing womankind accomplishments.
It is possible to eliminate gender bias when evaluating applications for research funding. Initiatives to increase gender equity have been undertaken by the Scientific Council of the European Research Commission. These initiatives seek to balance research teams and decision-making and incorporate gender evaluation into study and novelty. Funding bodies can guarantee that reviewers are trained to minimize unconscious prejudice and equalize the representation of women and men on review panels broken down by gender.
Conclusion
In the end, public health depends on the scientific community, patients, and an equal representation of women in research. Universities, funding organizations, and journals should review their rules, reaffirm their dedication to gender equity, and take steps to lessen the persistent and detrimental symptoms of underrepresented female authors.