Study shows gender gap in top medical journals

If the order of authors in medical studies didn’t matter, they might as well be arranged alphabetically, right? But the listing of first (and last) author does matter. Getting top billing can lead to increased prestige, pay and career opportunities.

A recent report from the British Medical Journal (BMJ) exposes a gender gap in the listing of authors in top tier medical research journals.

The study examined original research published in six highly respected journals between 1994 and 2014. The authors—Giovani Filardo, PhD, MPH, and Briget da Graca, MS, with Baylor Healthcare System in Dallas—found women to be more represented in 2014 than any prior year. But numbers have recently leveled off, suggesting women are underrepresented as lead authors.

The disparity exists despite women attending medical school in equal numbers as men in the U.S. since 2003.

In an accompanying editorial in BMJ, Kathryn M Rexrode, MD, MPH, argued eliminating this gender gap needs to be a priority for journals, universities and funding agencies.

NPR, along with Kaiser Health News, also investigated the study and the potential for gender bias in healthcare in its “All Things Considered” program.

""
Nicholas Leider, Managing Editor

Nicholas joined TriMed in 2016 as the managing editor of the Chicago office. After receiving his master’s from Roosevelt University, he worked in various writing/editing roles for magazines ranging in topic from billiards to metallurgy. Currently on Chicago’s north side, Nicholas keeps busy by running, reading and talking to his two cats.

Around the web

A string of executive orders from the White House created serious concerns among radiologists and other healthcare providers throughout the United States. The American College of Radiology issued a statement to help guide its members through the chaos. 

Bridgefield Capital, founded in 2015, has previously invested in such popular brands as Cirque Du Soleil, Del Monte and Quiksilver. This transaction is expected to be completed in the second half of 2025. 

Given the precarious excitement of the moment—or is it exciting precarity?—policymakers and healthcare leaders must set directives guiding not only what to do with AI but also when to do it.