Analysis of scientific society honors reveals disparities

Methods for retrospectively improving race/ethnicity data quality: a scoping review

Improving race and ethnicity (hereafter, race/ethnicity) data quality is imperative to ensure underserved populations are represented in data sets used to identify health disparities and inform health care policy. We performed a scoping review of methods that retrospectively improve race/ethnicity classification in secondary data sets. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, searches were conducted in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection databases in July 2022. A total of 2 441 abstracts were dually screened, 453 full-text articles were reviewed, and 120 articles were included. Study characteristics were extracted and described in a narrative analysis. Six main method types for improving race/ethnicity data were identified: expert review (n = 9; 8%), name lists (n = 27, 23%), name algorithms (n = 55, 46%), machine learning (n = 14, 12%), data linkage (n = 9, 8%), and other (n = 6, 5%). The main racial/ethnic groups targeted for classification were Asian (n = 56, 47%) and White (n = 51, 43%). Some form of validation evaluation was included in 86 articles (72%). We discuss the strengths and limitations of different method types and potential harms of identified methods. Innovative methods are needed to better identify racial/ethnic subgroups and further validation studies. Accurately collecting and reporting disaggregated data by race/ethnicity are critical to address the systematic missingness of relevant demographic data that can erroneously guide policymaking and hinder the effectiveness of health care practices and intervention.

Junior scientists spotlight social bonds in seminars for diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM

Disparities for women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers have continued even amidst mounting evidence for the superior performance of diverse workforces. In response, we launched the Diversity and Science Lecture series, a cross-institutional platform where junior life scientists present their research and comment on diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM. We characterize speaker representation from 79 profiles and investigate topic noteworthiness via quantitative content analysis of talk transcripts. Nearly every speaker discussed interpersonal support, and three-fifths of speakers commented on race or ethnicity. Other topics, such as sexual and gender minority identity, were less frequently addressed but highly salient to the speakers who mentioned them. We found that significantly co-occurring topics reflected not only conceptual similarity, such as terms for racial identities, but also intersectional significance, such as identifying as a Latina/Hispanic woman or Asian immigrant, and interactions between concerns and identities, including the heightened value of friendship to the LGBTQ community, which we reproduce using transcripts from an independent seminar series. Our approach to scholar profiles and talk transcripts serves as an example for transmuting hundreds of hours of scholarly discourse into rich datasets that can power computational audits of speaker diversity and illuminate speakers' personal and professional priorities.

Ten simple rules for organizing a special session at a scientific conference

Special sessions are important parts of scientific meetings and conferences: They gather together researchers and students interested in a specific topic and can strongly contribute to the success of the conference itself. Moreover, they can be the first step for trainees and students to the organization of a scientific event. Organizing a special session, however, can be uneasy for beginners and students. Here, we provide ten simple rules to follow to organize a special session at a scientific conference.