This study investigates gender disparities in the Spanish workforce's distribution in international and industry collaborative publications, highlighting common issues and potential differences. The work provides detailed information not only by gender but also by research field, research career, author position, and number of co-authors. The findings show a lower presence of women in both types of collaboration, even in 'Biomedical & Health Sciences', although there are more women in the total number of publications of this field. Women are under-represented in relevant authorship positions (first, last or corresponding author), possibly due to their concentration in the early career stages. A greater number of co-authors is associated with a decreased likelihood of holding relevant authorship positions, with some exceptions for women in international collaboration. This article aims to encourage responsible metrics by suggesting changes in evaluation policies to avoid indirect biases affecting gender and career progression., No

In the evolving landscape of scientific research, ORCID identifiers are essential for maintaining academic integrity and enhancing research visibility. This study proposes a methodological framework for identifying
and analyzing the presence and characteristics of researchers in a specific country in ORCID, using complementary data from OpenAlex to improve results. Our objectives were to develop a reliable method to identify ORCID records of researchers in Spain, study the frequency of profile updates, and investigate the most frequently filled metadata sections and common profile characteristics across disciplines. We identified
190,455 ORCID records of Spanish researchers and found high engagement with some metadata, particularly in the 'Employment' (73%) and 'Publications' (83%) sections. Additionally, 73% of records were actively maintained. The most common metadata combination included 'Works', 'Employment', and 'Education and Qualifications'. However, we noted significant variability and incomplete records across disciplines. The study highlights the need for more complete and frequently updated profiles, improved institutional integration, and strategic efforts to enhance ORCID adoption. These improvements could enhance the reliability of ORCID for tracking researcher mobility and academic trajectories., This work is part of the RESPONSIBLE project (Ref: PID2021-128429NB-I00) funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science (Ref: MCIN/AEI /10.13039/501100011033 FSE invierte en tu futuro, Peer reviewed

This research article delves into methodological challenges in scientometrics, focusing on errors stemming from the selection of classification schemes and document types. Employing two case studies, we examine the impact of these methodological choices on publication and citation rankings of institutions. We compute seven bibliometric indicators for over 8,434 institutions using 23 different classification schemes derived from Clarivate’s InCites suite, as well as including all document types versus only citable items. Given the critical role university rankings play in research management and their methodological controversies, our goal is to propose a methodology that incorporates uncertainty levels when reporting bibliometric performance in professional practice. We then delve into differences in error estimates within research fields as well as between institutions from different geographic regions. The findings underscore the importance of responsible metric use in research evaluation, providing valuable insights for both bibliometricians and consumers of such data, Peer reviewed

Also available at Zenodod, OSF Preprints, SocArXiv, This study analyzes the adoption and use of ORCID compared to other researcher profile systems across research domains and job categories at the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). The sample consists of authors affiliated with CSIC who published at least one publication between 2012 and 2022. The results reveal that the adoption rate of ORCID was lower than for Scopus Author ID and ResearcherID, but higher than for Google Scholar profiles. The ORCID profiles show a gender gap, with men registering more profiles and
completing more fields. Permanent researchers adopted ORCID to a greater extent and were among those who completed the most sections. Natural Resources and Social Science had the highest profile number, while Humanities displayed the most complete profiles. In addition, a rapid increase in ORCID registrations was observed in the early years following its implementation, followed by a gradual decline, while ORCID profile updates remained consistent over time. We hope our findings could inform institutional strategies to enhance the use of persistent identifiers, strengthen data completeness, and address the gender gap in ORCID adoption, ultimately supporting the CSIC’s commitment to open science and research integrity., No

González-Salmón, E., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Robinson-Garcia, N., & Nane, G. (2026). How to achieve gender parity in science? Providing global evidence on key educational and economic drivers. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18412269, Gender parity in science depends on a complex interplay of social, economic and educational variables. In this study, we compile a longitudinal dataset at the country level combining scientific bibliographic data from Dimensions, with the World Bank Open Data (WBOA), and the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). Our goal is to identify conditions and pathways that could lead to gender parity in different world regions, by applying time-series forecasting methods (ARIMA and Exponential Smoothing), along with correlation analysis and Bayesian networks. While results vary by region, one recurring recommendation emerging from our models is the need to increase the number of researchers and the percentage of women graduating in Engineering, Manufacturing, and Construction, as this appears to be a critical driver for reducing gender disparities in the scientific workforce., Peer reviewed

González-Salmón, E., & Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z. (2026). Triangle of Inequalities: Gender, Research Funding and Open Access in Spain. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18220752, Gender inequalities in science are widely documented, yet their persistence is often examined
through isolated dimensions such as productivity, funding or publishing practices. This study provides
an integrated analysis of how funding patterns, team structures and Open Access practices are associated
with women’s participation in scientific production in Spain. Using large-scale bibliometric data from
Web of Science (2008–2017), we analyse publications with at least one Spanish author, combining
information on author gender, funding acknowledgements, authorship roles and Open Access status
across five broad scientific fields.
The results reveal that gender inequalities are not driven by a single mechanism, but emerge
from the interaction of structural factors. Women are underrepresented in internationally funded
publications and in senior authorship positions, while they appear more frequently as first authors.
Mixed-gender teams consistently show more balanced participation and higher productivity for women,
highlighting collaboration as a key equalising context. Open Access uptake is shaped by funding
availability rather than gender, and incomplete funding information remains a major obstacle for
monitoring equity and visibility.
This study is particularly timely in the context of ongoing reforms in research assessment. By
offering integrated, system-level evidence, it contributes to debates on responsible metrics, funding
transparency and inclusive assessment practices. Rather than proposing new evaluative criteria, the
findings provide diagnostic insights to support evidence-informed reforms aimed at reducing structural
gender inequalities in science, No