Effect of Coronavirus Disease-2019 on the Workload of Neonatologists.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) on the neonatology workforce, focusing on professional and domestic workloads. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed US neonatologists in December 2020 regarding the impact of COVID-19 on professional and domestic work during the pandemic. We estimated associations between changes in time spent on types of professional and domestic work and demographic variables with multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Two-thirds (67.6%) of the 758 participants were women. Higher proportions of women than men were in the younger age group (63.3% vs 29.3%), held no leadership position (61.4% vs 46.3%), had dependents at home (68.8% vs 56.3%), did not have a partner or other adult at home (10.6% vs 3.2%), and had an employed partner (88.1% vs 64.6%) (P < .01 for all). A higher proportion of women than men reported a decrease in time spent on scholarly work (35.0% vs 29.0%; P = .02) and career development (44.2% vs 34.9%; P < .01). A higher proportion of women than men reported spending more time caring for children (74.2% vs 55.8%; P < .01). Reduced time spent on career development was associated with younger age (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.20-4.08) and number of dependents (aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.45). Women were more likely to report an increase in time spent time doing domestic work (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.07-2.19) and a reduction in time on self-care (aOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.29-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 significantly impacts the neonatology workforce, disproportionately affecting younger, parent, and women physicians. Targeted interventions are needed to support postpandemic career recovery and advance physician contributions to the field.

COVID-19 medical papers have fewer women first authors than expected.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in school closures and distancing requirements that have disrupted both work and family life for many. Concerns exist that these disruptions caused by the pandemic may not have influenced men and women researchers equally. Many medical journals have published papers on the pandemic, which were generated by researchers facing the challenges of these disruptions. Here we report the results of an analysis that compared the gender distribution of authors on 1893 medical papers related to the pandemic with that on papers published in the same journals in 2019, for papers with first authors and last authors from the United States. Using mixed-effects regression models, we estimated that the proportion of COVID-19 papers with a woman first author was 19% lower than that for papers published in the same journals in 2019, while our comparisons for last authors and overall proportion of women authors per paper were inconclusive. A closer examination suggested that women's representation as first authors of COVID-19 research was particularly low for papers published in March and April 2020. Our findings are consistent with the idea that the research productivity of women, especially early-career women, has been affected more than the research productivity of men.

Impact of COVID-19 on longitudinal ophthalmology authorship gender trends.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the gender gap in academic publishing. This study assesses COVID-19's impact on ophthalmology gender authorship distribution and compares the gender authorship proportion of COVID-19 ophthalmology-related articles to previous ophthalmology articles. METHODS: This cohort study includes authors listed in all publications related to ophthalmology in the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset and CDC COVID-19 research database. Articles from 65 ophthalmology journals from January to July 2020 were selected. All previous articles published in the same journals were extracted from PubMed. Gender-API determined authors' gender. RESULTS: Out of 119,457 COVID-19-related articles, we analyzed 528 ophthalmology-related articles written by 2518 authors. Women did not exceed 40% in any authorship positions and were most likely to be middle, first, and finally, last authors. The proportions of women in all authorship positions from the 2020 COVID-19 group (29.6% first, 31.5% middle, 22.1% last) are significantly lower compared to the predicted 2020 data points (37.4% first, 37.0% middle, 27.6% last) (p < .01). The gap between the proportion of female authors in COVID-19 ophthalmology research and the 2020 ophthalmology-predicted proportion (based on 2002-2019 data) is 6.1% for overall authors, 7.8% for first authors, and 5.5% for last and middle authors. The 2020 COVID-19 authorship group (1925 authors) was also compared to the 2019 group (33,049 authors) based on journal category (clinical/basic science research, general/subspecialty ophthalmology, journal impact factor). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 amplified the authorship gender gap in ophthalmology. When compared to previous years, there was a greater decrease in women's than men's academic productivity.

The impact of COVID-19 on academic productivity by female physicians and researchers in transfusion medicine.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have highlighted the disparities in gender equity that exist in different medical specialties. The COVID-19 pandemic has further heightened the inequity faced by female physicians as they are challenged by increasing household and childcare duties in addition to their professional responsibilities. Given these hurdles, fewer women than men have published in various medical disciplines. In this brief report, we wanted to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the academic output of female physicians and researchers in transfusion medicine. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared all articles in four transfusion medicine journals published from January 1 to July 31, 2019 with the same time period in 2020. Overall, 1024 articles were reviewed for whether they included women as first or senior authors. RESULTS: Overall, women were first authors in 45.9% (n = 458) of all publications and senior authors in 35% (n = 356) of all publications. There was a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of women as first authors between 2019 (49.1%) and 2020 (42.7%) (p = .04). There was no significant change in the percentage of women as senior authors between 2019 (35.4%) and 2020 (35.5%) (p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to other medical specialties, the COVID-19 pandemic has further increased the disparities faced by female researchers in transfusion medicine as evidenced by a decrease in publications with women as first authors.