Skip to main content

Table 3 Characteristics of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in eyes and vision

From: Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision

 

Cochrane systematic reviews

Non-Cochrane systematic reviews

Total

n (%)

n (%)

n (%)

Intervention systematic reviews

n = 313

n = 313

n = 626

 Same first and corresponding author

  Yes

237 (75%)

128 (41%)

365 (58%)

  Noa

76 (25%)

185 (59%)

261 (42%)

All author positionsb

 Gender of author (first and corresponding)c

n = 237

n = 128

n = 365

  Woman

106 (45%)

52 (41%)

158 (43%)

  Man

125 (53%)

70 (55%)

195 (53%)

  Unknown

6 (2%)

6 (5%)

12 (3%)

 Gender of author (first only)d

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

40 (53%)

58 (31%)

98 (37%)

  Man

34 (45%)

74 (40%)

108 (41%)

  Unknown

2 (3%)

53 (29%)

55 (21%)

 Gender of author (corresponding only)e

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

35 (46%)

31 (17%)

66 (25%)

  Man

36 (47%)

117 (63%)

153 (59%)

  Unknown

5 (7%)

37 (20%)

42 (16%)

“Best-case” sensitivity analysis: all unknown author genders are “women”

 Gender of author (first and corresponding)

n = 237

n = 128

n = 365

  Woman

112 (47%)

58 (45%)

170 (47%)

  Man

125 (53%)

70 (55%)

195 (53%)

 Gender of author (first only)

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

42 (55%)

111 (60%)

153 (59%)

  Man

34 (45%)

74 (40%)

108 (41%)

 Gender of author (corresponding only)

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

40 (53%)

68 (37%)

108 (41%)

  Man

36 (47%)

117 (635)

153 (59%)

“Worst-case” sensitivity analysis: all unknown author genders are “men”

 Gender of author (first and corresponding)

n = 237

n = 128

n = 365

  Woman

106 (45%)

52 (41%)

158 (43%)

  Man

131 (55%)

76 (59%)

207 (57%)

 Gender of author (first only)

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

40 (53%)

58 (31%)

98 (38%)

  Man

36 (47%)

127 (69%)

163 (62%)

 Gender of author (corresponding only)

n = 76

n = 185

n = 261

  Woman

35 (46%)

31 (17%)

66 (25%)

  Man

41 (54%)

154 (83%)

195 (75%)

  1. aIf it was unclear whether the first author was also the corresponding author, then the senior (i.e., last) author was considered the corresponding author
  2. bThis section includes all first and corresponding author positions (i.e., the same author may appear multiple times in any of these positions); thus, the total denominator is 887, not 751 (i.e., unique authors)
  3. cTotal denominator = 365 (237 for Cochrane and 128 for non-Cochrane systematic reviews: included only first authors that were also corresponding authors)
  4. dTotal denominator = 261 (76 for Cochrane and 185 for non-Cochrane systematic reviews: included only first authors that were not also corresponding authors)
  5. eTotal denominator = 261 (76 for Cochrane and 185 for non-Cochrane systematic reviews: included only corresponding authors that were not also first authors)
Back to article page

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053