State of the Journal: Women First Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editorial Board Members at Annals of Emergency Medicine

Gender Distribution Associated With the Journal Wilderness & Environmental Medicine

INTRODUCTION

Publication and peer review are fundamental to career advancement in science and academic medicine. Studies demonstrate that women are underrepresented in science publishing. We evaluated the gender distribution of contributors to Wilderness & Environmental Medicine (WEM) from 2010 through 2019.

METHODS

We extracted author data from ScienceDirect, reviewer data from the WEM Editorial Manager database, and editorial board data from journal records. Gender (female and male) was classified using automated probability-based assessment with Genderize.io software.

RESULTS

A total of 2297 unique authors were published over the 10-y span, generating 3613 authorships, of which gender was classified for 96% (n=3480). Women represented 26% (n=572) of all authors, which breaks down to 22% of all, 19% of first, 28% of second, and 18% of last authorships. Women represented 20% of peer reviewers (508/2517), 20% of reviewers-in-training (19/72), and 16% of editorial board members (7/45). The proportion of female authors, first authors, and reviewers increased over time. Women received fewer invitations per reviewer than men (mean 2.1 [95% CI 2.0-2.3] vs 2.4 [95% CI 2.3-2.5]; P=0.004), accepted reviews at similar rates (mean 73 vs 71%; P=0.214), and returned reviews 1.4 d later (mean 10.4 [CI 9.5-11.3] vs 9.0 d [95% CI 8.5-9.6]; P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

While female representation increased over the study period, women comprise a minority of WEM authors, peer reviewers, and editorial board members. Gender equity could be improved by identifying and eliminating barriers to participation, addressing any potential bias in review processes, implementing strategies to increase female-authored submissions, and increasing mentorship and training.

Gender Distribution of Emergency Medicine Podcast Speakers

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Over the past 2 decades, podcasting has become an easy and inexpensive way to disseminate information. Given the increasing importance of podcasts in medicine and medical education, it is important to understand the current status of diverse voices on podcasts. The primary objective of this study was to describe the distribution of women and men as hosts and guest speakers among 3 popular emergency medicine podcasts across a 10-year period. The secondary objective was to evaluate the association between host gender and speaker gender.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of the gender distribution of hosts and guest speakers among 3 popular emergency medicine podcasts from July 2011 to June 2021. Data were extracted and their gender determined using pronouns listed in their faculty profiles or using Genderize. The data were presented descriptively using subanalyses by year and the type of speaker. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the likelihood of a single host predicting a speaker's gender.

RESULTS

We identified 2,834 podcasts (n=5,962 speakers), with 964 (16.2%) women and 4,996 (83.8%) men speakers. Among hosts, 10.2% were women and 89.8% were men, whereas among guest speakers, 23.4% were women and 76.5% were men. The distribution of women speakers increased from 9.1% in 2011 to 23.1% in 2021. Having a woman host had an OR of 2.40 (95% CI 1.72 to 3.34) for having a woman guest speaker, whereas having a man host had an OR of 0.42 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.58) for having a woman guest speaker.

CONCLUSION

Among the 3 popular emergency medicine podcasts, there are few women speakers, hosts, and guest speakers; however, the proportion has risen over the past 10 years.

Influence of Factors Relating to Sex and Gender on Rank List Decisions and Perceptions of Residency Training: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Females make up more than half of medical school matriculants but only one-third of emergency medicine (EM) residents. Various factors may contribute to why fewer females choose the field of EM, such as the existing presence of females in the specialty.

OBJECTIVE

This study is a follow-up to previous work, and a survey is used to assess current residents' attitudes and perceptions on various factors, including those relating to sex and gender on creating rank lists as medical students and in perceived effects on residency education.

METHODS

A web-based survey consisting of Likert scale questions regarding a variety of factors influencing a student's decision to create a rank list and in perceived effects on residency education was sent to current EM residents in 2020.

RESULTS

Residents from 17 programs participated in the survey with an 18.2% (138/758) response rate. The most important factors in creating a rank list were the personality of residents in the program, location, and facility type. For factors specifically related to gender, respondents who answered affirmatively to whether the gender composition of residents affected the selection of a program in making a rank list were more likely to also answer affirmatively to subsequent questions related to the gender of program leadership (P<.001) and gender composition of attending physicians (P<.001). The personality of residents was also the most important factor perceived to affect residency education. For factors influencing rank list and residency education, female respondents placed higher importance on subcategories related to gender (ie, gender composition of the residents, of the program leadership, and of the attending physicians) to a significant degree compared with their male counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although factors such as location and resident personality show the most importance in influencing residency selection, when stratifying based on respondent sex, females tend to indicate that factors relating to gender have more influence on rank list and residency education compared with males.

Overcoming barriers to promotion for women and underrepresented in medicine faculty in academic emergency medicine

Equity in the promotion of women and underrepresented minorities (URiM) is essential for the advancement of academic emergency medicine and the specialty as a whole. Forward-thinking healthcare organizations can best position themselves to optimally care for an increasingly diverse patient population and mentor trainees by championing increased diversity in senior faculty ranks, leadership, and governance roles. This article explores several potential solutions to addressing inequities that hinder the advancement of women and URiM faculty. It is intended to complement the recently approved American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) policy statement aimed at overcoming barriers to promotion of women and URiM faculty in academic emergency medicine. This policy statement was jointly released and supported by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM), and the Association of Academic Chairs of Emergency Medicine (AACEM).

Gender distribution in emergency medicine journals: editorial board memberships in top-ranked academic journals

OBJECTIVE

Despite an established gender gap in academic medicine, evidence on gender diversity in emergency medicine is scarce. In the present study, gender distribution of editorial boards and among editors-in-chief of 31 emergency medicine journals was investigated in 2020/2021 and compared to 2015 and 2010. Additionally, gender distribution in editorial boards of emergency medicine journals was compared to editorial boards in five different medical specialties.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional analysis, gender of editorial board members and editors-in-chief of journals ranked in the Clarivate Analytics 'Journal Citation Report' (JCR) of 2019 in the sections 'Emergency Medicine', 'Medicine General and Internal', 'Surgery', 'Obstetrics and Gynecology', 'Pediatrics' and 'Orthopedics' were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the investigated 31 emergency medicine journals, three out of 35 editors-in-chief (9%) and 299 out of 1810 editorial board members (17%) were women in 2020/2021. In 2015 and 2010, two editors-in-chief were women (13% vs. 15%). In 2015, 19% of editorial board members were women and in 2010 it was 18%, respectively. There was no significant difference in gender distribution among editors-in-chief and editorial board members comparing 2020/2021 with 2015 and 2010 (P = 0.76 vs. P = 0.40, respectively). There was a lower percentage of women in editorial boards of emergency medicine journals compared to the top five JCR-ranked journals in the categories 'Medicine General and Internal', 'Surgery', 'Gynecology and Obstetrics' and 'Pediatrics'.

CONCLUSION

The gender gap in editorial boards and among editors-in-chief of emergency medicine journals seems to be consistent for the last 10 years. Gender disparity appears to be substantial in academic emergency medicine: The percentage of women in emergency medicine editorial boards was lower compared to editorial boards of four other medical specialties.

Women's representation in emergency medicine journals across two decades: 2000-2019

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim was to determine women's representation as authors in emergency medicine journals in various authorship positions over the last 20 years. The secondary aim was to compare the two decades to analyze the development over time.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective bibliometric analysis of three emergency medicine journals from the online archives of 2000-2019.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 7939 original research and review articles. Female authorships at the first (25,8%), last (18,7%), and corresponding (21,6%) positions were limited, despite the relatively high presence rate (72,5%). Women authored 13,1% of all single-authored publications. When the number of authors increased, the odds for women as co-authors increased. However, the odds for last and corresponding authorship decreased, while the odds for the first authorship remained unchanged. When two decades were compared, we found that proportions of women as first and corresponding authorship increased ([23,8% vs. 27,0%] p = 0.001 and [20,0% vs. 22,6%] p = 0.228, respectively) while the representation as the last author remained unchanged ([19,4% vs 18,3%] p = 0.006). The presence of women in any authorship position also increased significantly ([66,1% vs. 76,5%] p = 0.000) across two decades, with similar trends for the different journals studied. However, the yearly analysis shows that women's representation follows a fluctuating pattern with a minimal increase. When analyzing specific journals, we found that the increase in female authors as first and corresponding authors was limited to Academic Emergency Medicine ([24,7% vs 34,5%] p = 0.000 and [21,4% vs 32,1%] p = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study are promising in showing that the representation of women in emergency medicine publications is rising during the recent decade. Although the academic gender gap has not been closed, steps taken for gender equality in academic emergency medicine are clearly notable.

Here to chair: Gender differences in the path to leadership

OBJECTIVE

Career paths leading to department chair positions are elusive. Women represent only 11% of academic emergency department (ED) chairs. It is unclear whether the pathway to chair is different for men and women; the characteristics, achievements, and qualifications among those who become ED chairs is unknown.

METHODS

This study is a cross-sectional analysis of curriculum vitae (CV) of current ED chairs in departments with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited residency programs. Former women chairs were included due to paucity of current women chairs. Statistics were calculated using bivariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Of 163 eligible chairs, 88 CV (54%) were obtained, including six former women chairs. A majority (86.4%) self-identified as White/Caucasian, 21.5% were women, 46% were chief residents, 28.4% completed additional postgraduate degrees, and 21.8% were fellowship trained. At time of chair appointment, 58% were professor rank, 53.5% held ED operations roles, and 32% served as vice chair. Women were more likely to be in educational (53% vs. 22%) versus operational (26% vs. 61%, p = 0.02) roles. Women obtained more advanced degrees (47% vs. 25%, p = 0.02), were awarded more nonfederal grants (median = 7 vs. 3, p = 0.04), and achieved more national committee leadership (median = 4 vs. 1, p = 0.02). There were no gender differences in fellowship training, awards, leadership training programs, publications, federal grants, or national/international lectures after adjusting for years in practice.

CONCLUSION

While the majority of chairs held prior leadership roles in ED operations, only one in five women chairs did, suggesting gender differences in the path to chair attainment. These differences in paths may contribute to persistent gender disparities in ED chairs and may be influenced by career path choices, implicit bias, and structural barriers.

Prevalence of Discrimination, Abuse, and Harassment in Emergency Medicine Residency Training in the US

IMPORTANCE

The prevalence of workplace mistreatment and its association with the well-being of emergency medicine (EM) residents is unclear. More information about the sources of mistreatment might encourage residency leadership to develop and implement more effective strategies to improve professional well-being not only during residency but also throughout the physician's career.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence, types, and sources of perceived workplace mistreatment during training among EM residents in the US and the association between mistreatment and suicidal ideation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this survey study conducted from February 25 to 29, 2020, all residents enrolled in EM residencies accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) who participated in the 2020 American Board of Emergency Medicine computer-based In-training Examination were invited to participate. A multiple-choice, 35-item survey was administered after the examination asking residents to self-report the frequency, sources, and types of mistreatment experienced during residency training and whether they had suicidal thoughts.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The types and frequency of workplace mistreatment and the sources of the mistreatment were identified, and rates of self-reported suicidality were obtained. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine resident and program characteristics associated with suicidal thoughts.

RESULTS

Of 8162 eligible EM residents, 7680 (94.1%) responded to at least 1 question on the survey; 6503 (79.7%) completed the survey in its entirety. A total of 243 ACGME-accredited residency programs participated, and 1 did not. The study cohort included 4768 male residents (62.1%), 2698 female residents (35.1%), 4919 non-Hispanic White residents (64.0%), 2620 residents from other racial/ethnic groups (Alaska Native, American Indian, Asian or Pacific Islander, African American, Mexican American, Native Hawaiian, Puerto Rican, other Hispanic, or mixed or other race) (34.1%), 483 residents who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or other (LGBTQ+) (6.3%), and 5951 residents who were married or in a relationship (77.5%). Of the total participants, 3463 (45.1%) reported exposure to some type of workplace mistreatment (eg, discrimination, abuse, or harassment) during the most recent academic year. A frequent source of mistreatment was identified as patients and/or patients' families; 1234 respondents (58.7%) reported gender discrimination, 867 (67.5%) racial discrimination, 282 (85.2%) physical abuse, and 723 (69.1%) sexual harassment from patients and/or family members. Suicidal thoughts occurring during the past year were reported by 178 residents (2.5%), with similar prevalence by gender (108 men [2.4%]; 59 women [2.4%]) and race/ethnicity (113 non-Hispanic White residents [2.4%]; 65 residents from other racial/ethnic groups [2.7%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this survey study, EM residents reported that workplace mistreatment occurred frequently. The findings suggest common sources of mistreatment for which educational interventions may be developed to help ensure resident wellness and career satisfaction.

Gender inequalities on editorial boards of indexed pediatrics journals

BACKGROUND

The presence of women in decision-making positions, such as on editorial committees of biomedical journals, is not the same as that of men. This paper analyzes the gender composition of editorial committees (EBMs) and editors-in-chief (ECs) positions of pediatric journals.

METHODS

The gender of EBMs and ECs of 125 journals classified in the pediatrics area of the Journal Citation Report (JCR) was analyzed. The following indicators were calculated: gender distribution of ECs and EBMs by journal, publisher, subject speciality, country, quartile of the journal in JCR and country of affiliation of the members.

RESULTS

The total number of EBMs was 4242. The distribution by sex of the ECs was 19.44% women and 80.56% men, while that of the EBMs were 33.05% women and 66.95% men. Twenty journals exhibited a greater representation of women than of men, and in four there was parity. Journals with greater participation of women specialized in nursing and physical therapy and were related to nutrition (lactation and breastfeeding).

CONCLUSIONS

Only one-fifth of ECs and one-third of EBMs are females. Women's participation is higher in journals related to nursing, physical and occupational therapy, and nutrition. The United States has the highest number of EBMs, followed by the European Union.

IMPACT

Only one-fifth of Editors-in-chief in pediatrics journals are female. Only one-third of Editorial Board Members in pediatrics journals are female. Women's participation is higher in editorials committees in pediatrics journals related to nursing, physical and occupational therapy, and nutrition. Medical and pediatric associations and societies must work together to eliminate the disparities that exist between women and men. Achieving gender equity and empowering all women is one of the World Health Organization's Sustainable Development Goals.

Disparity in Gender Representation of Speakers at National Emergency Medical Services Conferences: A Current Assessment and Proposed Path Forward

INTRODUCTION

Gender disparities between Emergency Medicine physicians with regards to salary, promotion, and scholarly recognition as national conference speakers have been well-documented. However, little is known if similar gender disparities impact their out-of-hospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS) colleagues. Although there have been improvements in the ratio of women entering the EMS workforce, gender representation has improved at a slower rate for paramedics compared to emergency medical technicians (EMTs). Since recruitment, retention, and advancement of females within a specialty have been associated with the visibility of prominent, respected female leaders, gender disparity of these leaders as national conference speakers may contribute to the "leaky pipeline effect" seen within the EMS profession. Gender representation of these speakers has yet to be described objectively.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to determine if disparity exists in gender representation of speakers at well-known national EMS conferences and trade shows in the United States (US) from 2016-2020. The secondary objective was to determine if males were more likely than females to return to a conference as a speaker in subsequent years.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis of programs from well-known national conferences, specifically for EMS providers, which were held in the US from 2016-2020 was performed. Programs were abstracted for type of conference session (pre-conference, keynote, main conference) and speakers' names. Speaker gender (male, female) was confirmed via internet search.

RESULTS

Seventeen conference programs were obtained with 1,709 conference sessions that had a total of 2,731 listed speaker names, of whom 537 (20%) were female. A total of 30 keynote addresses had 39 listed speaker names of whom six (15%) were female. No significant difference was observed in the number of years males returned to present at the same conference as compared to females.

CONCLUSION

Gender representation of speakers at national EMS conferences in the US is not reflective of the current best estimate of the US EMS workforce. This disparity exists not only in the overall percent of female names listed as speakers, but also in the percent of individual female speakers, and is most pronounced within keynote speakers. Online lecture platforms, as an unintentional consequent of the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with intentional speaker development and mentorship initiatives, may reduce barriers to facilitating a new pipeline for more females to become speakers at national EMS conferences.

Gender differences in publication in emergency medicine journals

BACKGROUND

Some studies have suggested gender disparities in both pay and academic promotion which may adversely affect salary and career progression for female physicians. The areas of research output, funding, and authorship have not been fully and systematically examined in the emergency medicine literature. We hypothesize that gender differences may exist in research output, impact, authorship, and funding.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study examining all published articles in the top three emergency medicine journals as determined by Impact Factor between February 2015 and February 2018. We compared the authorship, number of citations of each article, funding, and h-index of each author by gender.

RESULTS

Of the 10,118 authors representing 4166 original articles in our sample, 7562 (74.7%) were male and 2556 (25.3%) were female, with females underrepresented relative to the known proportion of female emergency medicine faculty. Males were proportionally more likely to be last authors (OR 1.65, 95% CI, 1.47-1.86) and less likely to be first authors than females (OR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.77-0.94). No difference in proportions of males and females in terms of being named as having funding was found (OR 1.02, 95% CI, 0.78-1.35). Males had higher h-indexes than females (5 vs. 3, p < .001) as well as a higher average number of citations (OR 1.068, 95% CI, 1.018-1.119).

CONCLUSIONS

Males outnumber females in terms of numbers of publications, but also in number of citations, h-index, and last authorship. Future studies on physician gender disparities in emergency medicine need to account for these population differences.

Emergency Medicine Journal Editorial Boards: Analysis of Gender, H-Index, Publications, Academic Rank, and Leadership Roles

INTRODUCTION

Our goal in this study was to determine female representation on editorial boards of high-ranking emergency medicine (EM) journals. In addition, we examined factors associated with gender disparity, including board members' academic rank, departmental leadership position, h-index, total publications, total citations, and total publishing years.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we examined EM editorial boards with an impact factor of 1 or greater according to the Clarivate Journal Citations Report for a total of 16 journals. All board members with a doctor of medicine or doctor of osteopathic medicine degree, or international equivalent were included, resulting in 781 included board members. We analyzed board members' gender, academic rank, departmental leadership position, h-index, total publications, total citations, and total publishing years.

RESULTS

Gender disparity was clearly notable, with men holding 87.3% (682/781) of physician editorial board positions and women holding 12.7% (99/781) of positions. Only 6.6% (1/15) of included editorial board chiefs were women. Male editorial board members possessed higher h-indices, total citations, and more publishing years than their female counterparts. Male board members held a greater number of departmental leadership positions, as well as higher academic ranks.

CONCLUSION

Significant gender disparity exists on EM editorial boards. Substantial inequalities between men and women board members exist in both the academic and departmental realms. Addressing these inequalities will likely be an integral part of achieving gender parity on editorial boards.

Sex Distribution of Editorial Board Members Among Emergency Medicine Journals

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have demonstrated that a sex disparity exists in the editorial boards of select specialties. However, there are limited data with respect to emergency medicine. We seek to determine the sex distribution of editors in chief and editorial board members among emergency medicine journals.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional survey, we compiled a list of all emergency medicine journals, using the Scimago Journal & Country Rank on August 13, 2019. We excluded journals that were no longer published, were not emergency medicine journals, had rotating editorial boards for each issue, or had no first names listed. We obtained the sex and editorial board role by using publicly available data on the journal Web sites. We assigned sex according to knowledge of the member or his or her online faculty profile and used the Genderize program (Genderize.io, Roskilde, Denmark) when sex could not be determined with the above-mentioned approach. We report descriptive statistics for the categoric data, stratified by position (editor in chief, editorial board member, social media editor, resident/fellow member) and country.

RESULTS

We identified 73 journals in Scimago; 37 met inclusion criteria, with data available to determine the sex in 99.5% of cases. There were 46 total editors in chief, with only 4 (8.7%) being women. Of 1,477 total editorial board members, only 241 were women (16.3%), with a range of 0% to 33.3% per journal. We found that 28.6% of social media editors (2/7) at 4 journals and 70% of resident or fellow editors (7/10) at 5 journals were women.

CONCLUSION

There is a notable sex disparity among emergency medicine journals' editors in chief and editorial board members. Efforts should be made to improve sex distribution among editorial boards.

Gender Disparities in Academic Emergency Medicine: Strategies for the Recruitment, Retention, and Promotion of Women

Although women comprise half of all medical students, the number of female academic emergency medicine (EM) physicians remains at approximately 27%. In addition, despite having equivalent credentials, female EM faculty remain underrecognized and undercompensated when compared to their male counterparts. Recent studies have shown superior outcomes among patients treated by EM physicians who are women; however, disparities in advancement persist. This white paper, prepared on behalf of the Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine, describes recent evidence demonstrating gender disparities in the EM workforce including content presented at the 2019 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Annual Scientific Meeting. The authors describe strategies to address the identified problems. Specific recommendations include individual as well as institutional/systems-level approaches to creating directed programming and initiatives to recruit, support, and promote women at all aspects of the career continuum.