Leadership diversity in science: Women editors of dental journals are underrepresented compared to women editors of medical journals

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.

Women in leadership positions in dentistry: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this scoping review were to calculate the prevalence of women in leadership positions in dentistry, present existing research on gender (male, female) disparities affecting dentistry globally, identify gaps in the literature that can drive future research, and provide recommendations for achieving gender parity in leadership positions.

TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED

A search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed using search terms. The search strategies were developed to cover English-language articles from January 2016 through April 2022 that examined the prevalence of women in leadership positions in dentistry. Abstracts, newsletters, qualitative reports, and letters to the editors were excluded.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies met all inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Low prevalence was noted of women in leadership positions in dentistry globally. Multiple reasons that have led to gender disparities were identified and recommendations for decreasing gender disparities and achieving gender equity in dentistry were provided.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Over the years, several factors have contributed to gender inequalities in dentistry. However, during the past decade, gender equity, inclusion, and diversity have been recognized increasingly as core values of the dental profession. Presenting and analyzing all available data surrounding this topic are of paramount importance to start formulating appropriate strategies to achieve gender parity in all areas of dental leadership.

'You can't be what you can't see': equity, diversity and inclusivity of editorial teams of dental journals

Introduction Equity, diversity and inclusivity in research is critical to ensure all of society contributes.Aim This study analysed the gender and location (workplace) of editorial teams across 124 dental journals.Methods All chief editors of the 91 dental journals listed on the journal citation report for 2021 were contacted to provide details of the numbers of chief editors, other editors and the editorial board members, plus a summary of their demographic information including gender, age (group) and location. If chief editors did not respond, publicly available information was collated for the analysis. The same publicly available information of 45 PubMed indexed journals not on the citation report and three emerging online journals was also retrieved.Results Of the 159 chief editors across the 124 journals, 131 (82%) were men and 30% were based in the USA. Of the 1,265 other editors, two-thirds were from the USA, UK, Brazil and Japan. Of the 3,044 editorial board members, half were from the same four countries.Conclusions 'You can't be what you can't see': women and people from many parts of the world cannot see themselves as chief editors, other editors or editorial board members of dental journals.

Gender representation on editorial boards of leading oncology journals

Background

There has historically been women underrepresentation on editorial boards of peer-reviewed medical journals. High-ranked oncology journals showcase cancer-related scientific work at the forefront of the discipline. There is urgent need to investigate gender representation on editorial boards at leading oncology journals.

Materials and methods

Sixty high-ranked oncology journals based on impact factor calculated by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2021 from Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics were identified. Gender-related information of editorial boards was obtained from each journal’s website. The gender of each member of the editorial team was confirmed by an internet search for picture and/or gender-specific pronoun from journal or personal profile. Fisher’s exact tests and analysis of variance were used to analyze categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results

Among 4898 members on editorial boards of top oncology journals with the highest impact factor, 1177 were women. Women made up 24% (1177 of 4898) of members on editorial boards in top oncology journals, and there was significantly less women board members than men (P < 0.0001). The mean female composition of editorial boards of oncology journals was 27% (range from 4% to 100%). Among 71 editors-in-chief of the top oncology journals, 14 (20%) were women. There was a positive correlation between the presence of women in journal editorial leadership and the percentage of women on editorial boards (r_s = 0.340, P = 0.008). The underrepresentation of women on oncology journal editorial boards was significantly different among quartiles of journal impact factor. There was no significant correlation between women’s representation on journal editorial boards (%) and journal impact factors (r_s = 0.226, P = 0.086).

Conclusions

The results demonstrated that there are gender disparities among editorial leadership at high-impact oncology journals. There are cultural and structural barriers and prejudices to gender parity and diversity on editorial boards of oncology journals.

•

The representation of women on editorial boards of oncology journals has not been verified.

•

This large-scale study found that women comprised only 24% of editorial boards of top-ranked oncology journals.

•

The results demonstrated that there are gender disparities among editorial leadership at leading oncology journals.

Faculty diversity, equity, and inclusion in academic dentistry: Revisiting the past and analyzing the present to create the future

AIM

In 2021, NIDCR published the landmark report "Oral Health in America." It described that while oral health-related research and care has seen amazing progress, oral health inequities and lack of oral care for large segments of the US population have not improved. This situation plus the predicted increase of the diversification of the US population requires decisive actions to ensure that future dentists will be optimally prepared to provide the best possible care for all patients. A diverse dental educator workforce plays a crucial role in obtaining this goal. The objectives of this document were threefold. Aim 1 was to analyze past and current trends in the diversity and inclusion of historically underrepresented ethnic/racial (HURE) and marginalized (HURM) dental faculty members. Aim 2 focused on reviewing best practices and challenges related to achieving dental faculty and leadership diversity and inclusion. Aim 3 was to develop recommendations for increasing the diversity and inclusion of dental faculty in the present and future.

METHODS

An analysis of ethnicity/race and gender faculty data collected by the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) in 2011-2012 and 2018-2019 showed that achieving faculty diversity and inclusion has been an ongoing challenge, with limited success for faculty from HURE backgrounds. In order to create this much-needed change, best practices to increase the applicant pool, change recruitment strategies, and develop solid retention and promotion efforts were described. Research discussing the challenges to creating such changes was analyzed, and strategies for interventions were discussed.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, evaluations of efforts designed to create a more diverse and inclusive work force is crucial. Institutions must evaluate their diversity data, practices utilized, and the policies implemented to determine whether the desired outcomes are achieved. Only then will the future dental workforce be optimally prepared to provide the best possible care for all patients in the United States.