McCombeP. Women who contributed to research in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal2019. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/1352458519846101.
2.
SilverJKBankAMSlocumCS, et al. Women physicians underrepresented in American Academy of Neurology recognition awards. Neurology2018; 91: e603–e614.
3.
ThomsonAHorneRChungC, et al. Visibility and representation of women in multiple sclerosis research. Neurology2019; 92: 713–719.
4.
MoneimJColesAGiovannoniG, et al. Women on multiple sclerosis clinical trial steering committees. Ann Neurol2018; 84(2): 329–330.
5.
WittemanHOHendricksMStrausS, et al. Are gender gaps due to evaluations of the applicant or the science? A natural experiment at a national funding agency. Lancet2019; 393(10171): 531–540.
6.
BuddenAETregenzaTAarssenLW, et al. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends Ecol Evol2008; 23(1): 4–6.
7.
DonneJ.Devotions upon emergent occasions (MEDITATION XVII). London: John William Parker, 1839.
8.
NielsenMWAndersenJPSchiebingerL, et al. One and a half million medical papers reveal a link between author gender and attention to gender and sex analysis. Nat Hum Behav2017; 1(11): 791–796.
9.
SugimotoCRAhnY-YSmithE, et al. Factors affecting sex-related reporting in medical research: A cross-disciplinary bibliometric analysis. Lancet2019; 393(10171): 550–559.
10.
International Women in MS. Gender inequities in the multiple sclerosis community: A call for action. Ann Neurol2018; 84(6): 958–959.
