Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug 10:4:18.
doi: 10.12688/amrcopenres.13072.1. eCollection 2022.

The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages

Melina Andreou  1 , Narshil Choi  2 , Jorge Gómez Magenti  3 , Susan Kohlhaas  3 , Rosa Sancho  3
Affiliations

The dementia research career pipeline: Gender disparities in publication authorships and grant funding outcomes at different career stages

Melina Andreou et al. AMRC Open Res. .

Abstract

Background: Multiple studies have analysed gender disparities in academic research. Here we study the gender composition of the dementia research field at different stages in the career pipeline.

Methods: We use various data sources to gain insights about the gender ratio across career stages: conference attendance data as a proxy for the field as a whole; bibliometric data to know who publishes, and who occupies positions of seniority among the listed authors; and Alzheimer's Research UK's (ARUK) internal grant funding data to understand who obtains funding. We also analyse the scoring of grant applications based on the gender of the reviewers.

Results: Our results confirm that female researchers leave dementia academic research at higher rates than men, before transitioning into senior positions. In 2020, they comprised over 60% of the field, produced 54% of first authorships, but only accounted for 38% of last authorships. Overall, women received 37% of ARUK's competitive grants, with significant differences between grant schemes awarded for early career researchers (64% female awardees) compared to grant schemes aimed at senior researchers (33% female awardees). Men and women applied for and obtained grants at significantly different rates depending on the career stage at which the grant was aimed.Finally, we also observed that male and female reviewers apply evaluation criteria differently, with men giving better scores than women on average.

Conclusions: Our study adds to the evidence that shows that women get published less, receive less funding, and transition into senior academic positions at disproportionally lower rates than men do. We briefly discuss potential reasons why gender disparities arise as researchers progress into senior positions, and offer interventions ARUK can implement in its application and evaluation process to address those disparities.

Keywords: author lists; dementia research; gender disparities; grant applications; research funding.

Plain language summary

Alzheimer’s Research UK has conducted work to identify and address gender disparities along the career pipeline in dementia research. We used a mix of data from scientific publications (from more than 180,000 dementia research papers published between the years 2000 and 2020) and internal funding data (from more than 2,000 grant applications) to show that female researchers leave academia at higher rates than men before transitioning into senior positions. Women occupy fewer senior positions in authors list, despite being the majority of junior authors; they apply in lower numbers to senior grants schemes, despite being the majority of applicants to early career schemes; and they have lower success rates in obtaining funding for senior grant schemes, despite having higher success rate in junior calls. Moreover, our analysis shows that while the overall gender gap has been closing, the rate of change at senior positions has been slower than at junior positions, which indicates that women disproportionately face barriers that make their career progression more difficult. Alzheimer’s Research UK is using this information to inform programmes that will help brilliant researchers succeed in their careers without being hindered by external factors. This will allow us to for people with dementia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No competing interests were disclosed.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Schematic representation of the filters or barriers researchers need to go through to progress in their academic careers.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Percentage of female authors and authorships.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Gender distribution in first and last authorships between the years 2000 and 2020.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.. Percentage of applications from female researchers received by ARUK between the years 2000 and 2021.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.. Success rates to each grant type by male and female researchers.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.. Score distribution of ARUK grant applications by gender of the reviewer.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.. Score distribution of ARUK grant applications by the relationship gender of the reviewer and gender of the applicant.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. West JD, Jacquet J, King MM, et al. : The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e66212. 10.1371/journal.pone.0066212 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Holman L, Stuart-Fox D, Hauser CE: The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented? PLoS Biol. 2018;16(4):e2004956. 10.1371/journal.pbio.2004956 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Larivière V, Ni C, Gingras Y, et al. : Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature. 2013;504(7479):211–213. 10.1038/504211a - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gayet-Ageron A, Messaoud KB, Richards M, et al. : Female authorship of covid-19 research in manuscripts submitted to 11 biomedical journals: Cross sectional study. BMJ. 2021;375:n2288. 10.1136/bmj.n2288 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ruggieri R, Pecoraro F, Luzi D: An intersectional approach to analyse gender productivity and open access: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian National Research Council. Scientometrics. 2021;126:1647–1673. 10.1007/s11192-020-03802-0 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources