Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Adrián A. Díaz-Faes

Publications and source records attributed to Adrián A. Díaz-Faes.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Global Inequalities in Clinical Trials Participation

Clinical trials are fundamental to the production of medical evidence and determine who gains access to experimental therapies. Although prior work has long documented inequalities in global clinical trial participation, a systematic quantification of the relative contributions of country-level factors and disease burden remains absent. This paper analyzes inequality in participation across 78,117 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) spanning 16 major disease categories from 2000 to 2024. Linking 185.6 million RCTs participants to country-level disease burden, the paper shows that inequalities in RCTs participation are predominantly explained by country-level factors rather than disease burden. Country-level factors account for 88.9% of the variation in participation, whereas disease and temporal effects contribute marginally. Removing entire disease categories, including those traditionally underfunded, has little effect on overall inequality. Instead, participation is highly concentrated geographically, with a small group of Global North countries enrolling a disproportionate share of participants across nearly all diseases. These patterns persist despite decades of disease-targeted funding and increasing alignment between research efforts and disease burden. Findings also show that without parallel horizontal investments in research capacity, health infrastructure, and governance, even well-funded disease programs are insufficient to reduce inequality in clinical trial participation.

econ.GN↗

From academic to media capital: To what extent does the scientific reputation of universities translate into Wikipedia attention?

Universities face increasing demands to improve their visibility, public outreach, and online presence. There is a broad consensus that scientific reputation significantly increases the attention universities receive. However, in most cases estimates of scientific reputation are based on composite or weighted indicators and absolute positions in university rankings. In this study, we adopt a more granular approach to assessment of universities' scientific performance using a multidimensional set of indicators from the Leiden Ranking and testing their individual effects on university Wikipedia page views. We distinguish between international and local attention and find a positive association between research performance and Wikipedia attention which holds for regions and linguistic areas. Additional analysis shows that productivity, scientific impact, and international collaboration have a curvilinear effect on universities' Wikipedia attention. This finding suggests that there may be other factors than scientific reputation driving the general public's interest in universities. Our study adds to a growing stream of work which views altmetrics as tools to deepen science-society interactions rather than direct measures of impact and recognition of scientific outputs.

cs.DL↗