Differences in research funding for women scientists: a systematic comparison of UK investments in global infectious disease research during 1997–2010
TLDR
There are consistent differences in funding received by men and women PIs: women have fewer funded studies and receive less funding in absolute and in relative terms; the median funding awarded to women is lower across most infectious disease areas, by funder, and type of science.Abstract:
Objectives There has not previously been a systematic comparison of awards for research funding in infectious diseases by sex. We investigated funding awards to UK institutions for all infectious disease research from 1997 to 2010, across disease categories and along the research and development continuum. Design Systematic comparison. Methods Data were obtained from several sources for awards from the period 1997 to 2010 and each study assigned to—disease categories; type of science (preclinical, phases I–III trials, product development, implementation research); categories of funding organisation. Fold differences and statistical analysis were used to compare total investment, study numbers, mean grant and median grant between men and women. Results 6052 studies were included in the final analysis, comprising 4357 grants (72%) awarded to men and 1695 grants (28%) awarded to women, totalling £2.274 billion. Of this, men received £1.786 billion (78.5%) and women £488 million (21.5%). The median value of award was greater for men (£179 389; IQR £59 146–£371 977) than women (£125 556; IQR £30 982–£261 834). Awards were greater for male principal investigators (PIs) across all infectious disease systems, excepting neurological infections and sexually transmitted infections. The proportion of total funding awarded to women ranged from 14.3% in 1998 to 26.8% in 2009 (mean 21.4%), and was lowest for preclinical research at 18.2% (£285.5 million of £1.573 billion) and highest for operational research at 30.9% (£151.4 million of £489.7 million). Conclusions There are consistent differences in funding received by men and women PIs: women have fewer funded studies and receive less funding in absolute and in relative terms; the median funding awarded to women is lower across most infectious disease areas, by funder, and type of science. These differences remain broadly unchanged over the 14-year study period.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Are gender gaps due to evaluations of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency.
TL;DR: Gender gaps in grant funding are attributable to less favourable assessments of women as principal investigators, not of the quality of their proposed research.
Journal ArticleDOI
A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment
Pavel V. Ovseiko,Trisha Greenhalgh,Paula Adam,Jonathan Grant,Saba Hinrichs-Krapels,Kathryn E. A. Graham,Pamela A. Valentine,Omar Sued,Omar F. Boukhris,Nada M. Al Olaqi,Idrees S. Al Rahbi,Anne-Maree Dowd,Sara Bice,Tamika L. Heiden,Michael Fischer,Michael Fischer,Sue Dopson,Robyn Norton,Alexandra Pollitt,Steven Wooding,Gert V. Balling,Ulla Jakobsen,Ellen Kuhlmann,Ellen Kuhlmann,Ineke Klinge,Linda H. Pololi,Reshma Jagsi,Helen Lawton Smith,Henry Etzkowitz,Mathias Wullum Nielsen,Carme Carrion,Maite Solans-Domènech,Esther Vizcaino,Lin Naing,Quentin Cheok,Baerbel Eckelmann,Moses Simuyemba,Temwa Msiska,Giovanna Declich,Laurel Edmunds,Vasiliki Kiparoglou,Vasiliki Kiparoglou,Alison M.J. Buchan,Catherine Williamson,Catherine Williamson,Graham M. Lord,Graham M. Lord,Keith M. Channon,Keith M. Channon,Rebecca Surender,Rebecca Surender,Alastair M. Buchan,Alastair M. Buchan +52 more
TL;DR: It is argued that gender-sensitive research impact assessment could become a force for good in moving science policy and practice towards gender equity and is offered a set of recommendations to research funders, research institutions and research evaluators who conduct impact assessment.
Journal ArticleDOI
Assessment of potential bias in research grant peer review in Canada.
TL;DR: Evidence of bias in peer review of operating grants that is of sufficient magnitude to change application scores from fundable to nonfundable is found and should be addressed by training and policy changes in research funding.
Journal ArticleDOI
A systematic review of interventions to support the careers of women in academic medicine and other disciplines
TL;DR: This review suggests that targeted programmes have the potential to improve some outcomes for women in academia, however, the studies provide limited high-quality evidence to provide information for academic institutions in terms of the best way to improve outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender differences in grant and personnel award funding rates at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research based on research content area: A retrospective analysis
Karen E A Burns,Karen E A Burns,Karen E A Burns,Sharon E. Straus,Sharon E. Straus,Kuan Liu,Leena Rizvi,Gordon H. Guyatt +7 more
TL;DR: Gender disparity existed overall in grant and personnel award success rates, especially for grants directed to selected research communities, over a 15-year period and funding agencies should monitor for gender differences in grant success rates overall and by research content.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
TL;DR: In a randomized double-blind study, science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant, and preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role.
Journal ArticleDOI
Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science
TL;DR: It is concluded that differential gendered outcomes in the real world result from differences in resources attributable to choices, whether free or constrained, and that such choices could be influenced and better informed through education if resources were so directed.
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender, Family Characteristics, and Publication Productivity among Scientists
TL;DR: In this article, the relationship between marriage, parental status, and publication productivity for women in academic science, with comparisons to men, has been studied and found that women with preschool children have higher productivity than women without children or with school-age children.
Journal ArticleDOI
UK investments in global infectious disease research 1997–2010: a case study
TL;DR: The investments awarded to UK institutions for infectious disease research were described to show low levels of investment relative to burden for gastrointestinal infections, some neglected tropical diseases, and antimicrobial resistance.
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender inequality in awarded research grants
TL;DR: In the UK, it is unusual for a grant to be awarded for an amount less than that applied for, and previous indications indicate that success rates for research fellowships and project grants administered by the UK’s Wellcome Trust are equivalent for men and women, although fewer women apply for grants than would be expected.