Gender and editorship in oculoplastics societal publications

ABSTRACT

Purpose

The editorship of medical journals is a leadership role that can affect recognition and career advancement. We determine the gender representation of the editorial boards of oculoplastic surgery journals in comparison to the proportion of women in oculoplastics societies.

Methods

The gender composition of the American, European and Asia-Pacific societies of oculoplastic and reconstructive surgery and the editorial boards of their respective society journals were determined with online searches in March 2021. Statistical tests for the equality of proportions were performed.

Results

Excluding 44 individuals with missing gender data, the three combined oculoplastics societies comprised 1,230 distinct members, with 29% women. The editorial review boards of the three official society publications comprised 59 medical editors, 22% of which were women. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of women editors versus women OPRS members (p = .201) but the study is underpowered to detect a 7% difference. A sensitivity analysis with the missing data did not alter the conclusions. The mean h-index/m-quotient of the women editors was 20.50/0.87 and for the men 21.05/0.84, with no statistically significant difference (p = .903/0.851)

Conclusion

Women are underrepresented on the editorial boards of oculoplastic journals. Possible methods to improve gender balance include multicriteria objective decision-making criteria for editor nominations, mentoring peer reviewers that are women, and appointing a journal editor for equity, diversity and inclusion.

KEYWORDS:

• Academic medicine
• gender equity
• gender inequality
• oculoplastic

Acnknowlegements

We thank Dr. Wai Ching Lam (Hong Kong), Dr. Nav Nijhawan, and Drs. John Shin and Helen Shin (Toronto) for their invaluable assistance.

Data availability statement

The membership data for the oculoplastics societies is available from the societal websites.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website

Additional information

Funding

The authors have no funding to report.