Gender diversity analysis in Cochrane Systematic Reviews

Article type
Authors
Zambrano-Achig P1, Masson-Palacios M1, Montesinos-Guevara C1, Viteri-García A1
1Universidad UTE; Centro Asociado Cochrane de Ecuador; Centro de Investigación de Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica
Abstract
Background: Despite the increasing representation of women in science, they still encounter discrimination, limited opportunities to succeed and bias when compared with men. Gender diversity in science refers to the balance between gender at work, including the activities researchers are involved at and the time and dedication they spend in those tasks. Several organisations understand the importance of gender diversity to bring ideas, beliefs and perspectives from women, non-binary people and men into the team. Therefore, the aim of this work is to analyse the gender composition of Cochrane research groups in order to assess Cochrane’s performance in terms of gender diversity. In this analysis, gender diversity only refers to the composition of a research team based on binary gender, male and female.

Objectives: to systematically analyse binary gender composition in Cochrane research groups in order to assess Cochrane’s performance in relation to gender diversity.

Methods: we systematically searched in Cochrane Library for systematic reviews published between 21st February 2019 and 19th February 2020. Three reviewers (PZ, MM, CM) extracted data based on authors’ names. Extracted data included: authors’ gender, authorship (first author and last author), and number of women and men who published in each Cochrane group. Data was independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers.

Results: we retrieved and included a total of 577 published systematic reviews. According to data from authors’ name, 51% of team members are men and 49% are women. In terms of first author, 55% are women and 45% are men, while 40% of women and 60% of men published as last author. From the 52 included research groups, most of them include roughly similar number of women and men as authors. However, nine groups showed differences in gender diversity: The percentage of women authors were higher in the Public Health (76%); Drugs and Alcohol (74%); Skin (69%); Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS (62%); and Methodology Review groups (63%), while the percentage of men authors were higher in the Injuries (77%), Hepato-Biliary (67%), Urology (72%) and Heart (66%) groups.

Conclusions: this assessment shows that Cochrane composition of research groups is balanced in terms of binary gender diversity. However, some groups show differences in terms of authorship since most women in Cochrane research teams publish as first authors while most men publish as last authors.

Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: not applicable