A Comparison of the Representation of Women in Editor Positions at Major Medical Journals in 2021 vs 2011

Is there an editorial glass ceiling? Editorial leadership in nephrology and transplantation journals: A gender-based cross-sectional analysis

AIM

Editors-in-Chief (EiC) play a key role as gatekeepers in academic medicine, often shaping research agendas. Women have historically been underrepresented in editorial leadership roles in academic medicine. The purpose of this study was to examine gender representation among EiC of contemporary transplantation and nephrology journals.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated gender disparities among EiC of transplantation and nephrology medical journals. The study population was drawn from journals in two subject categories (1) 'Transplantation' and (2) 'Urology and Nephrology' in the 2023 Journal Citation Reports. Binary gender classification (woman/man) was determined by the names/pronouns used to describe the EiC on the journal or institutional webpage. The primary outcome was the proportion of women EiC. Secondary outcome was the proportion of women EiC based on journal topic, location and metrics. Descriptive statistics were used. Gender differences were compared using students t-test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

A total of 79 EiC were identified of which 16 (20%) were women and 63 (80%) were men (p < .001). Transplantation and nephrology journals had 21% and 20% women EiC, respectively. The proportion of women to men EiC was not impacted by journal category (p = .93), journal location (p = .61), journal impact factor (p = .71) or quartile (p = .59).

CONCLUSION

There was a disparity in gender representation in EiC in nephrology and transplantation journals, with men holding 80% of all positions. These findings, among growing evidence of gender disparity, highlight a need for targeted efforts to promote gender equity in academic medicine.

Twenty-Five Years of Progress-Lessons Learned From JMIR Publications to Address Gender Parity in Digital Health Authorships: Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Digital health research plays a vital role in advancing equitable health care. The diversity of research teams is thereby instrumental in capturing societal challenges, increasing productivity, and reducing bias in algorithms. Despite its importance, the gender distribution within digital health authorship remains largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the gender distribution among first and last authors in digital health research, thereby identifying predicting factors of female authorship.

METHODS

This bibliometric analysis examined the gender distribution across 59,980 publications from 1999 to 2023, spanning 42 digital health journals indexed in the Web of Science. To identify strategies ensuring equality in research, a detailed comparison of gender representation in JMIR journals was conducted within the field, as well as against a matched sample. Two-tailed Welch 2-sample t tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and chi-square tests were used to assess differences. In addition, odds ratios were calculated to identify predictors of female authorship.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that 37% of first authors and 30% of last authors in digital health were female. JMIR journals demonstrated a higher representation, with 49% of first authors and 38% of last authors being female, yielding odds ratios of 1.96 (95% CI 1.90-2.03; P<.001) and 1.78 (95% CI 1.71-1.84; P<.001), respectively. Since 2008, JMIR journals have consistently featured a greater proportion of female first authors than male counterparts. Other factors that predicted female authorship included having female authors in other relevant positions and gender discordance, given the higher rate of male last authors in the field.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an evident shift toward gender parity across publications in digital health, particularly from the publisher JMIR Publications. The specialized focus of its sister journals, equitable editorial policies, and transparency in the review process might contribute to these achievements. Further research is imperative to establish causality, enabling the replication of these successful strategies across other scientific fields to bridge the gender gap in digital health effectively.

The status of women in academic ophthalmology: Authorship of papers, presentations, and academic promotions

As the field of ophthalmology has evolved in the last several decades, so has the gender distribution of ophthalmologists. We conducted a narrative review to further characterise the status of women in the realm of publication, presentations, editorial positions, grants, academic promotion, and financial compensation. While the proportion of women publishing, presenting, and filling academic and editorial roles has increased over time, it still does not match that of men. Women are more likely to be first authors instead of senior authors, have lower average h-indices, and are awarded fewer grants. The magnitude of some of these differences is smaller when adjusted for women's shorter career duration on average. Despite increased representation of women in ophthalmology, women continue to receive less compensation for the same work. This review highlights that more can be done to improve gender parity in ophthalmology.

The Young European Resuscitation Council Resuscitation Science Masterclass - Concept and implementation

Nurturing the development of the next generation of resuscitation scientists is essential for creating a vibrant and enabled community equipped with the necessary knowledge, attitudes, and skills to transform resuscitation practice and improve outcomes. In this concept paper we will describe the development and implementation of the first Young European Resuscitation Council Resuscitation Science Masterclass. The masterclass aims to connect, inspire, and support the growth of the next generation of resuscitation scientists through education, networking, and joint scientific work. The masterclass provides 20 international, multi-professional early career resuscitation scientists with the opportunity to expand their knowledge and network as well as conduct joint scientific work over the course of one year. This is achieved by interactive webinars, innovative online workshops, engaging online journal clubs as well as an educational in-person event to conclude the masterclass. The Young European Resuscitation Council Resuscitation Science Masterclass aims to strengthen the global resuscitation community and next generation of resuscitation scientists by facilitating opportunities of broader international initiatives and collaboration for early career resuscitation scientists, potentially leading to accelerated recruitment of future resuscitation leaders. Ultimately, this masterclass may enable early career researchers to produce high impact research that can shape the future of resuscitation science and improve cardiac arrest patient care globally.

Female representation among editorial boards of social, clinical, and educational pharmacy journals

BACKGROUND

Recent studies on editorial team members of healthcare journals have been showing disparities in this distribution. However, there are limited data with respect to pharmacy journals. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the distribution of women among editorial board members of social, clinical, and educational pharmacy research journals around the globe.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted between September and October 2022. Data were extracted from Scimago Journal & Country Rank and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science Journal Citation Reports The top 10 journals in each region of the world (continents) were analyzed. Editorial board members were categorized into four groups and determined based on information available on the journal's website. The sex was classified in binary form through name and photography, the personal and institutional web pages, or the Genderize program.

RESULTS

A total of 45 journals were identified in the databases, of which 42 of them were analyzed. We identified 1482 editorial board members with only 527 (35.6%) being female. Analyzing the subgroups, there were 47 total editors-in-chief, 44 total co-editors, 272 associate editors, and 1119 editorial advisors. Of these, 10 (21.27%), 21 (47.72%), 115 (42.27%), and 381 (34.04%) were female, respectively. Only 9 journals (21.42%) presented more females among their editorial board members.

CONCLUSION

A notable sex disparity among social, clinical, and educational pharmacy journals' editorial board members was identified. Efforts should be made to involve more female sex in their editorial teams.