Eye (London, England) · 2026
Locally-affiliated authorship in global eye health research conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa between 2003 and 2022.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Herrod Scott K, Hutton-Mensah Edinam Y, Alder Connor J, Friedman David S, Zhao Yan, Ademola-Popoola Dupe, Essuman Vera A, Rees Chris A, Kalua Khumbo, Goss Deborah, Ehrlich Joshua R, Sherief Sadik Taju
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite calls for equitable global eye-health research partnerships, there are limited data on authorship trends in research from Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Our aims were to determine the magnitude, trends, associated factors, and gender disparities related to inequitable authorship in eye-health research conducted in SSA.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of SSA eye-health publications between 2003 and 2022. A systematic literature search was conducted. Data were manually extracted from the 1777 publications that met eligibility screening criteria. Namsor V.2 was used to classify author gender. Outcomes included no locally-affiliated authors and SSA-affiliated female authors.
RESULTS: Overall, 1777 publications were included. The percentage of publications with no locally-affiliated authors was 6% overall, 33% in the first author position, and 45% in the last author position. There were no significant trends in the exclusion of locally-affiliated authors between 2003 and 2022 (no authors: p = 0.899; no first authors: p = 0.515; no last authors: p = 0.574). Factors with a higher odds of no locally-affiliated authors at all or in prominent positions included high-income-country-affiliated co-authors, low-income study countries, randomised trials, high-impact research, US/UK journal publishers and funders, and trachoma publications. SSA-affiliated female authors were underrepresented in prominent authorship positions (first authors: p < 0.001; last authors: p < 0.001) and had lower odds of representation with US/UK journal publishers, low-income study countries, and randomised trials.
CONCLUSION: Inequitable authorship practices persist in eye-health research in SSA. Greater commitment towards partnership equity by ophthalmic researchers, journals, and funding organisations is needed.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of SSA eye-health publications between 2003 and 2022. A systematic literature search was conducted. Data were manually extracted from the 1777 publications that met eligibility screening criteria. Namsor V.2 was used to classify author gender. Outcomes included no locally-affiliated authors and SSA-affiliated female authors.
RESULTS: Overall, 1777 publications were included. The percentage of publications with no locally-affiliated authors was 6% overall, 33% in the first author position, and 45% in the last author position. There were no significant trends in the exclusion of locally-affiliated authors between 2003 and 2022 (no authors: p = 0.899; no first authors: p = 0.515; no last authors: p = 0.574). Factors with a higher odds of no locally-affiliated authors at all or in prominent positions included high-income-country-affiliated co-authors, low-income study countries, randomised trials, high-impact research, US/UK journal publishers and funders, and trachoma publications. SSA-affiliated female authors were underrepresented in prominent authorship positions (first authors: p < 0.001; last authors: p < 0.001) and had lower odds of representation with US/UK journal publishers, low-income study countries, and randomised trials.
CONCLUSION: Inequitable authorship practices persist in eye-health research in SSA. Greater commitment towards partnership equity by ophthalmic researchers, journals, and funding organisations is needed.