Gender bias in Argentine rheumatology research: a bibliometric analysis.

Abstract

Despite growing female participation in the workforce, gender disparities persist across sectors. Little is known about how these manifest in academic rheumatology in Argentina. To analyze recently published rheumatology research by Argentine authors from a gender perspective. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on rheumatology publications from 2018 to 2022 in the Argentine Journal of Rheumatology (AJR) and PubMed-indexed journals that included at least one Argentine author. Argentine authors were classified by gender, and authorship roles (overall, first, and corresponding authors) were assessed, along with pharmaceutical industry conflicts of interest (COIs). Of 130 AJR articles (1183 Argentine authors), 61.8% were women. In 440 PubMed-indexed articles (1957 Argentine authors), 55.2% were women. Women were more frequently first authors in both AJR and PubMed (67.7% vs. 58.4%; p = 0.13), but less often corresponding authors in PubMed (44%) than in AJR (60%; p = 0.02). In AJR, female authors had a higher median number per article (3, Interquartile range or IQR 2-6) than male authors (2, IQR 1-4; p = 0.002). In PubMed, male authors showed slightly greater median participation (1, IQR 1-2 vs. 1, IQR 0-2; p = 0.02). In industry-sponsored studies, only 28.1% of authors were women. In COI-declaring publications, 71.0% listed only male disclosures; of 153 total reports, just 26.8% were by women. Although women are the majority in Argentine rheumatology research, they remain underrepresented in leadership roles and industry-funded studies. Continued monitoring of gender and COI data is needed.