Research and publications

Research publications citing GenderAPI.io

Explore published research that explicitly identifies GenderAPI.io. Read how each study used the service, its historical context and what it can establish about today's API.

Page last reviewed

Read the method behind each citation

These independently published papers identify genderapi.io in their methods or linked references. We provide short summaries and links to the original publications so you can inspect the attribution and research design.

The papers describe historical research workflows. They are not customer testimonials or evaluations of the current V2 API. A study that combines several services or manual review cannot establish the performance of one component on its own.

  • Check the exact provider domain: GenderAPI.io and gender-api.com are separate services.
  • Read the study population, decision thresholds, handling of unknowns and manual-review steps before interpreting a result.
  • Keep inferred categories separate from self-reported gender. A study's binary labels do not represent every gender identity.

The Extent of Gender Gap in Citations in Ophthalmology Literature

The authors studied citations involving four ophthalmology journals. They applied an 85% probability threshold and used manual review for remaining papers.

The gender-determination method links directly to genderapi.io in footnote 1.

This documents historical use of GenderAPI.io within a bibliometric research workflow.

The study's manual check covered 100 authors from its own population; it does not establish current V2 accuracy. The workflow combined inference and manual review, and used binary categories that do not represent every gender identity.

The Extent of Gender Gap in Citations in Ophthalmology Literature
Publication detailReference
AuthorsSuqi Cao, Yue Xiong, Wenhua Zhang, Jiawei Zhou, Zhifen He
JournalFrontiers in Medicine
Publication date2022-05-18
Evidence typeHistorical research use
DOI10.3389/fmed.2022.855385

Gender parity in scientific authorship in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a bibliometric analysis

The authors examined 2,409 publications associated with the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, combining name inference with online research and direct contact for some authors.

The methods name genderapi.io and gender-api.com as separate tools.

This supports a historical research-use citation for GenderAPI.io as one component of a mixed workflow.

The paper does not isolate GenderAPI.io performance or assess the current V2 API. An institutional research setting does not establish a customer relationship, endorsement, or verified individual gender identity.

Gender parity in scientific authorship in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a bibliometric analysis
Publication detailReference
AuthorsSyed Ghulam Sarwar Shah, Rinita Dam, Maria Julia Milano, Laurel D Edmunds, Lorna R Henderson, Catherine R Hartley, Owen Coxall, Pavel V Ovseiko, Alastair M Buchan, Vasiliki Kiparoglou
JournalBMJ Open
Publication date2021-03-23
Evidence typeHistorical research use
DOI10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037935

Use current evidence for a new integration

For a new project, use the V2 documentation for current request, response and credit behavior. Our confidence guide separates per-result evidence from measured accuracy; the dated data profile reports database inventory and sample consistency rather than prediction accuracy.

Evaluate your intended population with an appropriate reference dataset. Report correct, incorrect, unknown and operational-error outcomes separately, and record the API version and any AI settings. Historical publication results should not become a universal accuracy claim for your application.

How we select and maintain this list

This is a curated bibliography, not an exhaustive count of publications using the service. We include a paper when its accessible full text identifies genderapi.io and explains how the tool was used. A generic mention of Gender API is insufficient, and conflicting provider references are held out of the list.

The review date describes our source check, not a new execution of the authors' methods. Citations do not imply an institutional partnership, author endorsement or permission to reuse a journal's logo. We link to the original papers and summarize them in our own words.

To suggest a correction or another paper, send its DOI or full-text link and the passage identifying the provider. We review the source before adding a reference.