In the academic life sciences, it turns out that men secure patents at more than twice the rate of women. Fiona Murray, an associate professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, just co-authored a study on the issue, and says the disparity isn’t a case of women being less accomplished. “Women just seem to have weaker ties to industry.”

The findings, released this month, point to some far-reaching consequences. One is that women lose out financially, but worse, society never sees the benefits of their research efforts.

The study looked at more than 4,000 life scientists over a 30-year period, and found that 6 percent of the women held patents compared to 13 percent of the men. Among the patent holders, men amassed a total of 1,286 patents, women only 92.

Without the connections, the study discovered, patenting for women becomes a more costly exercise—compared to men, who can simply call an industry contact for an opinion on what is patentable, and what isn’t. Without an industrial-strength Rolodex, Ms. Murray says, women are losing out. They miss out on the royalties, corporate consulting opportunities, and the opportunity to launch a business off the back of a patent.

But the study did find that younger women scientists are starting to exhibit attitudes similar to their male counterparts. Both sexes, for instance, see patents as a legitimate avenue to disseminate research.

And with more women entering Ph.D. life-science programs, the patenting gap could be closing, says Lesa Mitchell, a vice president at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, which helped sponsor the study.

Both Ms. Mitchell and Ms. Murray believe that mentoring programs could help close the gap. “[But] there seems to be a potential for a sting in the tail,” Ms. Murray says. Although men and women sound more similar in some ways now, the study shows that the gender gap widens over the course of careers.

Contact the Writer: RBarron@RedHerring.com