Despite increased numbers of female researchers, women still face more difficulties than their male counterparts when it comes to publishing their work and having it read and cited. In this editorial, the main recommendations are detailed in order to promote gender parity in the scientific arena. Specifically, we must review the make-up of the editorial boards responsible for the publication processes, the evaluation process and the review criteria in place for scientific works.

She didn’t write it.

She wrote it, but she shouldn’t have.

She wrote it, but look what she wrote about.

She wrote it, but she wrote only one of it.

She wrote it, but she isn’t really an artist, and it isn’t really art.

She wrote it, but she had help.

She wrote it, but she’s an anomaly.

She wrote it, BUT...

Joanna Russ, 1983. Quoted in Margaret Rossiter 1993.

Almost 25 years have passed since these words were first written and, despite increased numbers of female researchers, women still face more difficulties than their male counterparts when it comes to publishing their work and having it read and cited. The proportion of biomedical articles with a woman as the main author is around 30%, and there are marked differences between specialties.1 2 Women are still under-represented in the editorial boards of health magazines, especially in terms of the most prestigious jobs involving the most responsibility, and less than 20% of directors’ posts in scientific societies are held by women.3^–5 The gap between the contributions made by men and those made by women in the processes for the …