Background

Differential participation and success in grant applications may contribute to women’s lesser representation in the sciences. This study’s objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to address the question of gender differences in grant award acceptance rates and reapplication award acceptance rates (potential bias in peer review outcomes) and other grant outcomes.

Methods

The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021232153) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 standards. We searched Academic Search Complete, PubMed, and Web of Science for the timeframe 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2020, and forward and backward citations. Studies were included that reported data, by gender, on any of the following: grant applications or reapplications, awards, award amounts, award acceptance rates, or reapplication award acceptance rates. Studies that duplicated data reported in another study were excluded. Gender differences were investigated by meta-analyses and generalized linear mixed models. Doi plots and LFK indices were used to assess reporting bias.

Results

The searches identified 199 records, of which 13 were eligible. An additional 42 sources from forward and backward searches were eligible, for a total of 55 sources with data on one or more outcomes. The data from these studies ranged from 1975 to 2020: 49 sources were published papers and six were funders’ reports (the latter were identified by forwards and backwards searches). Twenty-nine studies reported person-level data, 25 reported application-level data, and one study reported both: person-level data were used in analyses. Award acceptance rates were 1% higher for men, which was not significantly different from women (95% CI 3% more for men to 1% more for women, k = 36, n = 303,795 awards and 1,277,442 applications, I² = 84%). Reapplication award acceptance rates were significantly higher for men (9%, 95% CI 18% to 1%, k = 7, n = 7319 applications and 3324 awards, I² = 63%). Women received smaller award amounts (g = -2.28, 95% CI -4.92 to 0.36, k = 13, n = 212,935, I² = 100%).

Conclusions

The proportions of women that applied for grants, re-applied, accepted awards, and accepted awards after reapplication were less than the proportion of eligible women. However, the award acceptance rate was similar for women and men, implying no gender bias in this peer reviewed grant outcome. Women received smaller awards and fewer awards after re-applying, which may negatively affect continued scientific productivity. Greater transparency is needed to monitor and verify these data globally.

中文翻译：

---

同行评审的赠款申请、奖励和金额中的性别差异：系统回顾和荟萃分析

背景

资助申请的不同参与和成功可能导致女性在科学领域的代表性较低。本研究的目的是进行系统审查和荟萃分析，以解决赠款接受率和重新申请获奖接受率（同行评审结果中的潜在偏见）和其他赠款结果中的性别差异问题。

方法

该审查已在 PROSPERO (CRD42021232153) 上注册，并根据 PRISMA 2020 标准进行。我们检索了 2005 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 12 月 31 日期间的 Academic Search Complete、PubMed 和 Web of Science，以及前向和后向引用。包括的研究按性别报告了以下任何一项的数据：拨款申请或重新申请、奖励、奖励金额、奖励接受率或重新申请奖励接受率。排除在另一项研究中报告的重复数据的研究。通过荟萃分析和广义线性混合模型研究了性别差异。Doi 图和 LFK 指数用于评估报告偏差。

结果

搜索确定了 199 条记录，其中 13 条符合条件。来自正向和反向搜索的另外 42 个来源符合条件，总共 55 个来源具有一个或多个结果的数据。这些研究的数据范围从 1975 年到 2020 年：49 份来源是发表的论文，6 份是资助者的报告（后者是通过向前和向后搜索确定的）。29 项研究报告了个人层面的数据，25 项研究报告了应用程序层面的数据，一项研究报告了两者：个人层面的数据被用于分析。男性的获奖接受率高出 1%，这与女性没有显着差异（95% CI 男性多 3%，女性多 1%，k = 36，n  = 303,795 个奖项和 1,277,442 份申请，I ² = 84%)。男性的重新申请奖励接受率明显更高（9%，95% CI 18% 至 1%，k  = 7，n  = 7319 份申请和 3324 份奖励，I ²  = 63%）。女性获得的奖励金额较小（g  = -2.28，95% CI -4.92 至 0.36，k  = 13，n  = 212,935，I ²  = 100%）。

结论

申请助学金、重新申请、接受奖励、再次申请后接受奖励的女性比例低于符合条件的女性比例。然而，女性和男性的获奖接受率相似，这意味着在这一同行评审的资助结果中没有性别偏见。女性在重新申请后获得的奖励越来越少，这可能会对持续的科学生产力产生负面影响。需要更大的透明度来在全球范围内监控和验证这些数据。