The Effects of Editorial-Board Diversity on Race Scholars and Their Scholarship: A Field Experiment

Twelve tips for strengthening global equity in health professions education publication

Despite recent calls to engage in scholarship with attention to anti-racism, equity, and social justice at a global level in Health Professions Education (HPE), the field has made few significant advances in incorporating the views of the so-called "Other" in understanding the nature, origin, and scope of knowledge as well as the epistemic justification of knowledge production. Editors, authors, and reviewers must take responsibility for questioning existing systems and structures, specifically about how they diffuse the knowledge of a few and silence the knowledge of many. This article presents 12 recommendations proposed by The Global South Counterspace Authors Collective (GSCAC), a group of HPE professionals, representing countries in the Global South, to help the Global North enact practical changes to become more inclusive and engage in authentic and representative work in HPE publishing. This list is not all-encompassing but a first step to begin rectifying non-inclusive structures in our field.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Reporting and Representation of Race/Ethnicity in 310 Randomized Controlled Trials of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medications

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reporting of race/ethnicity data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications. Secondary objectives were to estimate temporal trends in the reporting, and to compare the pooled prevalence of racial/ethnic groups in RCTs conducted in the US to national estimates.

METHOD

We drew on, adapted, and updated the search of a network meta-analysis by Cortese et al. (2018) up to March 2022. We calculated the percentage of RCTs reporting data on race/ethnicity of participants in the published article or in related unpublished material. Temporal trends were estimated with logistic regression. The pooled prevalence of each racial/ethnic group across US RCTs was calculated using random-effects model meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We retained 310 RCTs (including 44,447 participants), of which 231 were conducted in children/adolescents, 78 in adults, and 1 in both. Data on race/ethnicity were reported in 59.3% of the RCTs (75% of which were conducted in children/adolescents and 25% in adults) in the published article, and in unpublished material in an additional 8.7% of the RCTs. Reporting improved over time. In the US RCTs, Asian and White individuals were under- and overrepresented, respectively, compared to national estimates in the most recent time period considered.

CONCLUSION

More than 30% of the RCTs of ADHD medications retained in this review did not include data on race/ethnicity in their published or unpublished reports, and more than 40% in their published articles, even though reporting improved over time. Results should inform investigators, authors, editors, regulators, and study participants in relation to efforts to tackle inequalities in ADHD research.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

A systematic review of 310 randomized controlled trials for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications found that race/ethnicity were reported in only 30% of trials. Compared to national estimates, Asian individuals were underrepresented and non-Hispanic Whites individuals were overrepresented, drawing attention to the inequities in participation in ADHD research.

DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT

One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our reference list. While citing references scientifically relevant for this work, we also actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our reference list. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.

STUDY PREREGISTRATION INFORMATION

Reporting and representation of race/ethnicity in double blind randomised controlled trials of medications for ADHD; https://osf.io/; hfgz8.

Language development, linguistic input, and linguistic racism

Language development is both remarkable and unremarkable. It is remarkable because children learn the language(s) around them, signed or spoken, without explicit instruction or correction. It is unremarkable because children have done this for thousands of years without worldwide incident or catastrophe. Yet, much research on this organic developmental phenomenon relies on an empirical falsehood: "quality" linguistic input is necessary to facilitate language development. "Quality" is a value judgment, not a structural feature of any human language. I argue selectively legitimizing some linguistic input as "quality" is possible only through mischaracterizing what language is. This falsehood is also linguistic racism because it is based on a deficit perspective of the early linguistic experiences of a subset of children, specifically racialized children. I explore how linguistic racism stalls our collective understanding of language development and promotes an environment of bad science. This article is categorized under: Linguistics > Language Acquisition Psychology > Language Neuroscience > Development.

Dealing With Diversity in Psychology: Science and Ideology

In the spirit of America's Shakespeare, August Wilson (1997), I have written this article as a testimony to the conditions under which I, and too many others, engage in scholarly discourse. I hope to make clear from the beginning that although the ideas presented here are not entirely my own-as they have been inherited from the minority of scholars who dared and managed to bring the most necessary, unpalatable, and unsettling truths about our discipline to the broader scientific community-I do not write for anyone but myself and those scholars who have felt similarly marginalized, oppressed, and silenced. And I write as a race scholar, meaning simply that I believe that race-and racism-affects the sociopolitical conditions in which humans, and scholars, develop their thoughts, feelings, and actions. I believe that it is important for all scholars to have a basic understanding of these conditions, as well as the landmines and pitfalls that define them, as they shape how research is conducted, reviewed, and disseminated. I also believe that to evolve one's discipline into one that is truly robust and objective, it must first become diverse and self-aware. Any effort to suggest otherwise, no matter how scholarly it might present itself, is intellectually unsound.

Advancing Diversity in Behavior Genetics: Strategies for Incorporating Undergraduates into Student-Driven Research

Undergraduate research experiences are crucial for fostering the next generation of behavior genetics researchers. However, incorporating undergraduates into research can be challenging for faculty mentors. In this article, we provide strategies for successfully integrating undergraduates into behavior genetics research based on our experiences mentoring undergraduates in our lab. These strategies include: (1) Practicing reflexivity, specifically an ongoing self-examination and critical self-awareness of personal biases, beliefs, and practices; (2) Implementing an Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access (IDEA) centered approach; (3) empowering students through clear expectations; (4) Providing focused training and mentorship; (5) Aligning research projects with student interests; (6) Assigning meaningful tasks; and (7) Facilitating professional development opportunities. By following these strategies, faculty mentors can cultivate a supportive and inclusive research environment that empowers undergraduates for successful careers in behavior genetics research.

Gender Equality in Antiphospholipid Syndrome Publications: A Comprehensive Analysis of First Author Trends

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a condition characterized by the production of procoagulant antibodies, which in turn increases the risk of thrombotic events in multiple blood vessels and is associated with recurrent miscarriages and premature births. The study aimed to identify and analyze the gender trends of the first authors in PubMed-indexed publications related to APS. The present cross-sectional study analyzed all PubMed-indexed articles published between January 2018 and December 2022. All articles with the term "antiphospholipid syndrome" in their titles were included in the study. Full names and countries were used to determine the gender of the author in the NamSor application program interface (API) and statistical analysis was done using R software version 4.3.1 (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria) and the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model. Finally, a total of 1176 articles were evaluated in the study after the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The highest number of publications by female first authors was in the year 2022 with a total of 132 articles published. Forecasting predicts that by 2027, approximately 122 articles will be published by male authors and 132 articles will be published by female authors. The highest female-to-male publication ratio is seen in Russia, with a ratio of 2, followed closely by Poland (1.86) and Greece (1.85). In conclusion, gender equality has not significantly improved in the field of APS research. Thus, the gender gaps must be addressed, to advance the medical field, improve patient care, and ultimately contribute to better health outcomes for women worldwide.

Exploring Diversity in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Journal Editorial Boards

OBJECTIVE

Despite increasing diversity in medical school entrants, disparities exist in academic leadership. This study sought to examine the proportion of women and visible minorities (VMs) among editorial board members (EBMs) of otolaryngology journals.

METHODS

Two reviewers collected journal, editorial board, and editor-in-chief characteristics using journal mastheads or official websites. Gender and VM representation on editorial boards and factors associated with increased representation were investigated.

RESULTS

Forty-one journals were explored, from January to April 2022. Of 2128 EBMs, 663 (31.3%) were VMs and 551 (25.9%) were women. Editor-in-chief roles were held by 12 (25%) VM individuals and 3 (6.2%) women. Gender differences in the distribution of editorial board positions were found (P < .001); women had higher representation as associate editors (24.5%, n = 551 vs 15.4, n = 1577%) and deputy/managing editors (2.2%, n = 551 vs 0.4%, n = 1577), while men were more represented as editor-in-chief (2.9%, n = 1577 vs 0.5%, n = 551). Similar VM representation existed between genders (31.0% male; 31.6% women) (P = .80). Journal impact factor quartile and gender were significantly correlated (P < .001); a higher proportion of women were represented in the first (27.0% vs 24.5%) and fourth (12.0% vs 4.9%) quartile. No significant factors were identified for higher women's editorial board representation. Larger editorial board size (P = .002) and Asian/South American journals (P = .003 to P < .001) had significantly higher representation of VMs.

CONCLUSION

Women and VMs are underrepresented in high-ranking editorial positions. Diversity in editorial boards is needed to ensure fair and balanced journal reviews and equity within otolaryngology.

The representation of authors of color in schizophrenia research articles published in high-impact psychiatric journals

OBJECTIVE

We evaluate how often scholars of color publish papers on schizophrenia in high-impact psychiatric journals, and whether they are more likely than white authors to prioritize race/ethnicity as a primary variable of interest in analyses.

METHODS

Prior work categorized the types of ethnoracial analyses reported in 474 papers about schizophrenia published in high-impact psychiatric journals between 2014 and 2016. In this study, the photographs of the first and last author for each paper were coded as "person of color" (POC) or "white". Additionally, each author was asked to self-report their race and ethnicity. The percentage of papers published by white versus POC authors was calculated. Chi-square analyses tested the hypotheses that (a) white scholars are more likely than POC scholars to conduct any sort of racial analysis; (b) POC scholars are more likely to conduct primary analyses by race/ethnicity; and (c) white scholars are more likely to analyze race/ethnicity as extraneous variables.

RESULTS

Eighteen percent of papers were published by POC first authors, and 17% were published by POC last authors. There were minimal differences in the types of analyses conducted by POC and white authors. Self-reported race/ethnicity showed that Asian scholars were the most highly represented within POC authors (9% of respondents), but only 3% of authors identified as Hispanic/Latinx and none identified as Black or Indigenous American.

CONCLUSIONS

People of color are underrepresented as authors in US-based schizophrenia research published in high-impact journals. Culturally-informed mentorship as well as prioritization of race/ethnicity in funding structures are important to increase representation of POC authors.

Fighting the 400-Year Pandemic: Racism Against Black People in Organizations

Anti-Black racism is a pernicious problem that has plagued the USA throughout history. In 2020, we saw intense moments that highlighted the stark anti-Black racism and racial inequity in America. Namely, the murder of George Floyd coupled with the disproportionate levels of negative outcomes from the COVID-19 pandemic affecting Black people in the USA. These instances called attention to the considerable racial inequality in US society and reminded many people that racism seeps throughout all facets of life. Our first goal with this special issue was to call attention to research within in the organizational sciences that focuses on anti-Black racism. The articles in this issue call attention to some of the manifestations and consequences of anti-Black racism as well as ways to reduce its insidious effects. Our second goal was to intentionally highlight the work of Black scholars in the field of I-O psychology. As such, we engaged in targeted recruiting that allowed us to successfully curate articles from a racially diverse group of scholars, and we are able to highlight the work of Black scholars and practitioners in the field.

A perspective on enhancing representative samples in developmental human neuroscience: Connecting science to society

Marginalized groups are often underrepresented in human developmental neuroscientific studies. This is problematic for the generalizability of findings about brain-behavior mechanisms, as well as for the validity, reliability, and reproducibility of results. In the present paper we discuss selection bias in cohort studies, which is known to contribute to the underrepresentation of marginalized groups. First, we address the issue of exclusion bias, as marginalized groups are sometimes excluded from studies because they do not fit the inclusion criteria. Second, we highlight examples of sampling bias. Recruitment strategies are not always designed to reach and attract a diverse group of youth. Third, we explain how diversity can be lost due to attrition of marginalized groups in longitudinal cohort studies. We provide experience- and evidence-based recommendations to stimulate neuroscientists to enhance study population representativeness via science communication and citizen science with youth. By connecting science to society, researchers have the opportunity to establish sustainable and equal researcher-community relationships, which can positively contribute to tackling selection biases.