How an IJES Working Group Grappled with the Complexities of Three Letters-DEI-With the Goal to Broaden Inclusion and Representation in Exercise Science Research.

A self-study of International Journal of Exercise Science (IJES) publications from 2008 through 2021 revealed a sex-data gap in participant and corresponding author representation. This finding prompted the creation of the IJES Working Group for Opportunity, Representation, and Diverse Perspectives. We are a collaborative team of authors, reviewers, and editors, spanning both rural and urban teaching- and research-focused institutions, who assembled regularly starting in September 2023. The goal was to contemplate potential challenges and opportunities around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), elicit discourse, and broaden inclusion and representation in exercise science research. Our group identified six main challenges/opportunities: 1) Mixed Definitions and Applications of DEI Principles; 2) Competing Lifeviews and Worldviews; 3) Oversight and Enforcement of DEI Principles in IJES; 4) Oversight and Enforcement of DEI Principles in the Broader Field; 5) IJES is a Home for Developing Scholars; and 6) Lag Time for Creating Change in IJES. As a growing international journal, we depend on a diverse group of authors, reviewers, editors, and readers to achieve our mission. Accordingly, the Working Group encourages impactful, inclusive research that broadens representation within exercise science.

Gender representation trends in cardiothoracic surgery journal editorial boards.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize chronologic trends of gender composition of the editorial boards of major cardiothoracic surgery journals in the current era. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed of gender representation in editorial board members of 2 North American cardiothoracic surgery journals from 2008 to 2023. Member names and roles were collected from available monthly issues. Validated software programming was used to classify gender. The annual proportion of women representation was compared to the thoracic surgery workforce. RESULTS: During the study period, 558 individuals (3641 names) were identified, 14.3% of whom were women. The total number of editorial board women increased for both journals. The proportion of women also increased from 2.5% (3 out of 118) in 2008 to 17.8% (71 out of 399) in 2023 (P < .001), exceeding the percentage of women in the thoracic surgery workforce, which increased from 3.8% in 2007 to 8.3% in 2021 (P < .001). The average duration of participation was longer for men than for women (53.8 vs 44.5 months; P = .01). Women in editorial board senior roles also increased from 3.3% (1 out of 30) in 2008 to 28.6% (42 out of 147) in 2023 (P < .001), almost triple the increase in nondesignated roles from 2.3% (2 out of 88) in 2008 to 11.5% (29 out of 252) in 2023 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, the appointment of women to the editorial boards of high-impact cardiothoracic surgery journals and senior roles have proportionally exceeded the overall representation of women in cardiothoracic surgery. These findings indicate progress in inclusive efforts and offer insight toward reducing academic gender disparities.

Assessing the H-Indexes of Editorial Board Members in Ophthalmology Journals Published in Türkiye.

Objectives: The focus of this study was to assess and compare the h-indexes of editorial board members from eight ophthalmology journals in Türkiye and explore the potential correlations between these indexes and the sub-specialties of board members. Methods: Conducted in December 2023, this cross-sectional study utilized publicly available data from Google Scholar (GS), Web of Science, and Scopus. The h-index and number of publications by editorial board members from eight Turkish ophthalmology journals were analyzed. Statistical analysis for this study involved the use of SPSS, employing descriptive statistics, one-way analysis of variance, and post hoc tests for group comparisons. Results: Of the 415 editorial board members, 26 were not ophthalmologists and 12 worked abroad; the credentials of 10 could not be verified. A total of 367 authors were evaluated, revealing significant differences in publication numbers and h-indices among the different subspecialties. Notably, the retinal specialists demonstrated higher productivity. Variability in citation counts was observed across databases, with GS having the widest range. Differences were also noted in the publication and h-index among the editorial boards of different journals. Conclusion: The h-index and number of publications effectively reflected the active status of ophthalmology authors. This study contributes valuable information regarding Turkish ophthalmology journals and their editorial boards, serving as an inspiration for young ophthalmologists. These findings underscore the diverse successes of ophthalmologists across subspecialties, encouraging the exploration of less-explored areas in academic pursuits.

Gender Parity Analysis of the Editorial Boards of Influential Dermatology Journals: Cross-Sectional Study.

This study underscores the persistent underrepresentation of women in academic dermatology leadership positions by examining the gender composition of editorial boards across top dermatology journals, emphasizing the urgent need for proactive strategies to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Composition of the editorial staff of major spinal journals based on geo-economic background: A survey analysis.

Background: The widespread absence of papers originating in low and middle income economies (LAMIE) across various scholarly disciplines has been widely acknowledged. One potential reason for this could be editorial biases against submissions from LAMIE. Although this bias has been observed in different academic areas, its extent in spinal research remains largely uninvestigated. This research endeavored to investigate the composition of editorial staff members (ESM) within major spinal journals and scrutinize the degree of international diversity represented among the ESM. Methods: We pinpointed ten major spinal journals by referencing their presence in the Journal Citation Reports of 2021. Countries of the ESM affiliated with these journals were categorized according to World Bank classifications. Following this, we conducted a thorough analysis of the ESM compositions. Results: A total of 982 ESM from 50 countries were identified. The United States exhibited the highest representation among ESM (395, 40.22%), followed by South Korea (57, 5.80%), Switzerland (53, 5.40%). When segmented by geographical regions, North America emerged with the highest representation, constituting 43.38% of ESM at 426, trailed by Europe & Central Asia at 31.16% (306), East Asia & Pacific at 17.92% (175). The majority of ESM, amounting to 87.98%, hailed from high income economies (HIE). There was an absence of ESM representation of low income economies. The relationship regarding the quantity of ESM in each country and its population failed to demonstrate significance (p = 0.274, r = 0.281). However, a notable positive correlation emerged when exploring the connection between ESM numbers and gross domestic product (p = 0.033, r = 0.517). Conclusions: Major spinal journals exhibit a notable absence of international representation within their editorial boards, predominantly comprising members from HIE. This underscores a substantial underrepresentation of ESM originating from LAMIE within the sphere of spinal investigation.

Analyzing the composition of the editorial boards in high-impact medical ethics journals: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: The underrepresentation of scholarly works from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in academic literature is a documented concern, attributed partly to editorial biases. This trend, prevalent across various disciplines, has been less explored in the context of medical ethics journals. This study aimed to examine the composition of editorial board members (EBM) in high-impact medical ethics journals and to evaluate the extent of international diversity within these editorial teams. METHODS: This study incorporated an analysis of 16 high-impact medical ethics journals. Information regarding the EBM of these journals was systematically gathered and categorized based on the World Bank's country income classifications. An in-depth examination of the editorial board compositions was then conducted. RESULTS: The study identified 669 EBM across the selected journals. A predominant 89.84% (601) of these members were from high-income countries (HICs), with upper-middle-income countries contributing 7.47% (50) and lower-middle-income countries 2.69% (18). No EBM were associated with low-income countries. A regional breakdown indicated that North America was the most represented area, accounting for 48.88% (327), followed by Europe & Central Asia (27.50%, 184), East Asia & Pacific (13.45%, 90), Latin America & Caribbean (4.63%, 31), Sub-Saharan Africa (4.19%, 28), Middle East & North Africa (0.75%, 5), and South Asia (0.60%, 4). In total, these EBMs hailed from 46 different countries, with the United States representing the largest proportion (43.80%, 293), followed by the United Kingdom (13.15%, 88), Australia (7.92%, 53), Germany (6.73%, 45), and Canada (5.08%, 34). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant lack of international representation within the EBM of high-impact medical ethics journals. The majority of editors in this field are affiliated with HICs, leading to a severe underrepresentation of LMICs within the editorial boards.

Gender and Geographical Distribution of Editorial Board Members of Three Leading Suicide Journals.

Background: Despite the recent progress of women in academia, there is an underrepresentation of female editors in academic journals. Additionally, although suicide affects more low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) than high-income countries, little is known about the geographical distribution of editors in suicidology journals. Aims: We aimed to determine the gender and geographical distribution of the editorial board members (EBMs) of leading suicide journals. Method: Data were collected between November 27 and 29, 2022. We purposively selected suicidology journals, searched the journal websites, and extracted data on the gender and affiliated country of the EBM to identify the continent and income category of the country. Results: The proportion of female EBMs was 32.37% with better representation in senior positions. Only six positions (3.47%) were occupied by four individuals affiliated with LMIC backgrounds. The highest number of EBMs was located in North America (58.38%) while one member was from Africa. Limitations: Only three purposively selected journals were scrutinized. Conclusion: This study reveals that approximately one third of the editorial positions were occupied by women and less than 4% of editors were from LMICs, where suicide represents a significant burden.

Gender inequality among the editorial boards of periodontology and implantology journals.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate gender composition of the editorial board members of the journals in the field of periodontology and implantology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A rigorous search was performed through Web of Science database to identify journals, scoping on the periodontology and implantology research fields. Data on journal's demographic information, gender of the editorial board members were gathered from the journals fulfilling the predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Variables including journal impact factor and quartiles were extracted as well. RESULTS: The proportion of women in the editorial team in periodontology journals was 27.3%, whereas it was almost 19% in implantology journals. As for editorial leadership, these ratios were 22.1% and 19.8%, respectively. There were significantly less women than men in editor-in-chief position in periodontology journals (p = 0.042). Journal metrics had no impact on the gender distribution of editor-in-chief positions in both fields. CONCLUSIONS: Women seem to be under-represented as editorial leaders or board members in journals of periodontology and implantology. The proportion of women in periodontology journals has increased in the last decade; however, there is still a clear need for further increase to have a gender balance.

Dermatology Journals' Editorial Boards Require Improved Gender Equity: JMIR Dermatology's Future Directions.

Gender disparities exist across all facets of academic medicine including within the editorial boards of dermatology journals. Only 22% of these editorial boards comprised women, even though 51% of full-time, faculty dermatologists are female. When inviting academic dermatologists to our editorial board at JMIR Dermatology, we invited 50% women to represent the gender distribution of academic dermatologists; however, we have not sufficiently reached gender equity among accepted editorial board members. We will continue to strive toward the goal of gender equity on our editorial board and invite other dermatology journals to do the same.

How international are the editorial boards in the field of hand research? A cross-sectional study of leading subspecialty hand journals.

BACKGROUND: Although low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have great disease burden, but the lack of studies from LMIC have been shown in several fields. Multiple researchers from LMIC perceive editorial bias against their studies. Editorial board members (EBMs) from LMIC are under-represented across many medical journals. It is still unclear whether this phenomenon exists in the field of hand research. The purpose of this study was to investigate the composition of EBMs in leading subspecialty hand journals, and to reveal the international representation of EBMs in the field of hand research. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included seven leading subspecialty hand journals. The EBMs were obtained from the journals' websites. The country affiliations of EBMs were categorized based on their locations and economy status. The composition of EBMs was investigated. RESULTS: There were 211 EBMs in the seven journals. A total of 185 EBMs (87.7%) were affiliated with high-income countries (HIC), 18 (8.5%) with upper middle-income countries, and 8 (3.8%) with lower middle-income countries. None EBMs were affiliated with low income countries. The EBMs were affiliated with 30 countries. The biggest number of EBMs were affiliated with the USA 74 (35.07%), followed by the United Kingdom (45, 21.33%), and France (13, 6.16%). Most of EBMs were based in Europe and Central Asia (86, 40.8%) and North America (81, 38.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The EBMs of leading subspecialty hand journals are dominated by HIC with a very low representation of LMIC. There is a need to make the editorial boards more international in the field of hand research.

Poor Representation of Developing Countries in Editorial Boards of Leading Obstetrics and Gynaecology Journals.

Evidence suggests a limited contribution to the total research output in leading obstetrics and gynaecology journals by researchers from the developing world. Editorial bias, quality of scientific research produced and language barriers have been attributed as possible causes for this phenomenon. The aim of this study was to understand the prevalence of editorial board members based out of low and lower-middle income countries in leading journals in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology. The top 21 journals in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology were selected based on their impact factor, SCImago ranking and literature search. The composition of the editorial boards of these journals was studied based on World Bank Income Criteria to understand the representation status of researchers from low and lower-middle income countries. A total of 1315 board members make up the editorial composition of leading obstetrics and gynaecology journals. The majority of these editors belong to high-income countries (n = 1148; 87.3%). Low (n = 6; 0.45%) and lower-middle income (n = 55; 4.18%) countries make up for a very minuscule proportion of editorial board members. Only a meagre 9 out of 21 journals have editorial board members from these countries (42.85%). Low and low-middle countries have poor representation in the editorial boards of leading obstetrics and gynaecology journals. Poor representation in research from these countries has grave consequences for a large proportion of the global population and multidisciplinary collaborative efforts must be taken to rapidly change this statistic with immediate effect.

Composition and Gender Distribution of Editorial Boards for Top Neurosurgical Journals.

BACKGROUND: Though women now comprise approximately 21.5% of all neurosurgery residents in the United States, women only represent 10% of practicing neurosurgeons nationally. Serving as a journal editor is 1 measure of academic success. We investigated characteristics of editorial boards for top neurosurgical journals to identify factors influencing membership on editorial boards. We sought to identify gender differences to explain the paucity of women on editorial boards. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of editorial boards for the top 10 English-language neurosurgical journals. Data were obtained from journal websites, program faculty lists, or physician online profiles. Gender differences were compared using Student t test and χ2 analysis. RESULTS: Seven hundred twenty-two editorial board members were examined (female n = 65; male n = 650; unidentified n = 7). Overall, women had fewer years in practice (P = 0.002) and more often had additional advanced degrees (P = 0.009) while men had higher h-indices (P < 0.0001). Within the boards of Neurosurgery and Acta Neurochirurgica, men had been in practice longer (P = 0.014; P = 0.023) and had higher h-indices (P = 0.003; P = 0.025). Male editors for Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine and World Neurosurgery had higher h-indices (P = 0.007; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Women constitute ∼9% of editorial boards for top neurosurgical journals, a percentage comparable to the amount of practicing female academic neurosurgeons. This finding is encouraging as in that there appears to be no readily identifiable bias in the selection of editorial board members. The differences in years in practice and h-index suggest that gender distribution may equalize with time as more women enter practice and produce scientific literature. Efforts to recruit and retain women in neurosurgery should be pursued to rectify this discrepancy.

BJPsych Open: a summary of growth and vision for my second innings as editor-in-chief.

As my second 5-year term as its editor-in-chief begins, it is important to review what BJPsych Open has accomplished, its areas of growth and what should be our future vision for the Journal. The keyword throughout this editorial is growth, with emphasis on growth in quality, for meaningful growth can only exist with increased quality. The original remit remains the correct long-term direction for the Journal, with the important modifier 'relevance' added to ensure quality - a general psychiatric journal with high-quality, methodologically rigorous and relevant publications, with relevance to the advancement of clinical care, patient outcomes, the scientific literature, research and policy. During this second term, I desire to expand the editorial board to fill expertise and diversity gaps; increase editorials and commentaries highlighting specific articles and timely events with psychiatric themes; focus on thematic series driven by the editorial board; and address under-represented topics.

Analysis of repeated roles in editorial boards at oncology focused journals.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Our objective was to investigate current landscape of editorial board members at oncology journals with a focus on characteristics of editorial board members who serve on editorial boards at multiple journals concurrently. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study describing characteristics of editorial board members at oncology journals with an impact factor (IF) of ≥ 10 in the 2020 Journal Citation Reports. RESULTS: A total of 73 journals in the period of 2016-2020 were analyzed. A total of 5833 editorial roles were included in our final analysis of which 3979 (68%) roles were carried by men and 3572 (61%) were members located in the US. Repeated roles occurred in 1101 (19%; range: 2-6 roles) of total included editorial roles and were distributed in 488 distinct editorial members. Most editorial board members with repeated roles carried either 2 roles (80%) or 3 roles (17%); however, 18 (3%) editorial board members carried ≥ 4 roles at different journals. A total of 23% of editors-in-chief carried another editorial role at a different journal. Only 1% of all editorial roles were carried by individuals affiliated with universities located in low- or middle-income countries. CONCLUSION: One-fifth of the editorial board positions were held by members who served on more than one editorial board, including members serving as editors-in-chief. Editors with repeated roles may be at higher risk for influence from competing interests and diminished quality of work, may contribute to publication delays, and may limit editorial opportunities for other qualified scientists. POLICY STATEMENT: A considerable number of editorial team members had multiple roles across various cancer-focused journals, including members serving as editors in chief. Such repeated roles limit appropriate representation and hinders diversity in academia. Regulations to prevent repeated editorial roles are needed.