Coparenting, mental health, and the pursuit of dignity: A systems-level analysis of refugee father-mother narratives.

Research on coparenting is virtually absent from the refugee literature, despite its importance for family systems, children's bio-behavioural and emotional development, and intergenerational responses to social change. In 2022, we conducted 30 semi-structured interviews with Syrian refugees in Jordan and used thematic analysis to examine how fathers and mothers (n = 15 dyads) enacted parenting together. We identified four approaches characterising how couples navigated coparenting interactions, family cohesion, and intergenerational change. These were negotiation, mirroring, anchoring, and transformation. Specifically, Syrian couples negotiated how to balance responsibilities, sought emotions and behaviours that reflected calm and respect, prioritised family togetherness over education or resettlement opportunities, and, strikingly, adopted gentler parenting approaches to transform intergenerational experiences. Underpinning these four themes were efforts to uphold family dignity. Syrians described themselves as ordinary parents, eschewing the label of refugee parents and building a normal life for their families after war and displacement. Our thematic analysis offers methodological and conceptual advances in exemplifying how to capture a dyadic understanding of coparenting and why refugees strive to parent in ways that sustain mental health and dignity. This systems-level analysis of coparenting in dignity is specifically relevant to strengthening the processes of family-level communication and to designing integrated programs that support caregiving, wellness, and family unity. Our findings lay the groundwork for developing a relational, agentic model of family caregiving systems in the context of precarity and forced displacement.

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.