Gender Distribution of Editorial Board Members in Anaesthesiology Journals: Assessment of Gender Parity

Creative Commons License

Yakar M. N., Bilge D., Shermatov N., Oltulu M., Hancı V.

II. Uluslarası Katılımlı Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Sempozyumu, Ankara, Türkiye, 02 Aralık 2022 - 03 Ocak 2023, ss.181-186

  • Yayın Türü: Bildiri / Özet Bildiri
  • Basıldığı Şehir: Ankara
  • Basıldığı Ülke: Türkiye
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.181-186
  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

INTRODUCTION - PURPOSE: Gender disparity is a crucial matter in different fields of medicine (1-3) and persists in anesthesiology (4, 5). However, gender diversity on editorial boards of anesthesiology journals remains unclear. A greater understanding of this issue may improve the policies targeting gender parity. This cross-sectional study aims to analyze the gender distribution of editorial board members of anesthesiology journals and reveal independent factors related to gender diversity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The local ethics committee of Dokuz Eylül University approved the study (Date:31.08.2022 and nubmber:2022/28-08). Editorial board members of the anesthesiology journals indexing in Web of Science, Science Citation Index-Expanded core collection were enrolled in the study. Participants’ genders were defined according to first names/pictures obtained from journals’ websites between 01 and 20 October 2022. Publisher properties and journal metrics were also recorded. Chi-square, Fisher exact, Mann–Whitney U tests, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient were used for the analysis. Independent factors related to gender diversity were revealed by using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: Women's representation on editorial boards and among editors-in-chief were 23.6% (n=503) and 2.7% (n=1), respectively. The Web of Science Coverage Category of Neurosciences (Odds ratio [OR], 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36–0.75, p < 0.001), the UK as a publisher country (OR, 0.68, 95% CI, 0.51–0.90, p = 0.007), Canada as a journal country (OR, 0.45, 95% CI, 0.21–0.99, p = 0.046), and Cataloging and Classification Quarterly category of Q1 (OR, 0.52, 95% CI, 0.31–0.86, p = 0.011) were independently related to gender parity. Conversely, the uni-disciplinary perspective of editorial board policy was independently related to gender disparity (OR, 1.34, 95% CI, 1.03–1.73, p = 0.028).

DISCUSSION - CONCLUSION: The study revealed an under-representation of women on anesthesiology journals’ editorial boards, especially in leadership positions. Further efforts are needed to expand diversity policies to foster fair conditions for all anesthesiology professionals.