Gender Parity Analysis of the Editorial Boards of Influential Dermatology Journals: Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Women continue to be underrepresented in academic leadership positions, especially in dermatology [1]. Although women account for more than half of all board-certified dermatologists in the United States, academic dermatology leadership roles, such as department chair and fellowship director positions, remain disproportionately occupied by men [2]. This inequity extends to medical journals, with substantial gender gaps reported in editorial board composition across multiple specialties; previously published data from 2018 suggested that women accounted for the minority of dermatology editors in all positions [1]. To provide an evaluation of current trends, the composition of dermatology editorial boards by gender was assessed in 2021, making comparisons among highly indexed dermatology journals.

Methods

The top 20 most impactful dermatology journals by the 2020 h-index were identified on Scimago [3]. Journal editorial board websites were searched in November 2021 for lists of editor names and roles, and journal-defined editorial board members were identified and tabulated. Binary (women vs men) gender estimation by author first name was performed with Gender API [4], a popular gender inference service based on querying large multifactorial databases and name repositories. Estimations were corroborated by web-based searches of professional photographs and biographies by 2 independent researchers, with in-depth discussion and consensus meetings to resolve discrepancies.

Results

Editorial board membership averaged 37% (SD 12%) women, with a median of 33% (IQR 18%) women across the journals analyzed (Figure 1 and Table 1). The Journal of Dermatological Science (11/73, 15%) and Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (14/64, 22%) had the lowest proportions of women editors, whereas Contact Dermatitis (21/36, 58%), Sexually Transmitted Infections (44/82, 54%), and Sexually Transmitted Diseases (49/93, 53%) had among the highest. The editorial board of Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Dermatology was observed to be 56% (15/27) women after excluding International Advisory Committee members. Of the 20 journals, only 5 (25%) had women editors-in-chief.

‎

Discussion

Our findings suggest that an underrepresentation of women on dermatology editorial boards concerningly persists across multiple top journals, recapitulating earlier findings by Lobl and colleagues [1] while highlighting potential ongoing challenges in addressing gender disparities within editorial boards. However, limitations of our study include reliance on high-throughput software examining first names only and estimating binary gender, which may lead to misclassification and lacks acknowledgment of individuals identifying as nonbinary or transgender. Indeed, it has been recognized that Gender API may not be accurate when performing estimations on first names considered to be gender neutral [4]. Future work analyzing self-reported sex and gender identity to ensure true concordance with the individual’s identity is needed.

Abating the gender gap among editorial boards may improve the editorial review process and the diversity of perspectives offered, along with expanding the use of inclusive language and encouraging diverse author representation. Editors-in-chief and academic journal leadership should evaluate board member recruitment with the goal of gender parity, where having 50% women on editorial boards could more accurately represent the dermatology workforce [1]. Furthermore, those serving in senior editor positions may wield considerable influence over the journal and editorial procedures, emphasizing the need for a careful and nuanced approach to fostering overall inclusivity. Subsequent analysis by editor roles, credentials, backgrounds, and experience across different journals may assist with driving meaningful change. As part of JMIR Dermatology’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the publication and peer-review process, a recent editorial uncovered additional areas for improvement in DEI [5]. Very few dermatology journals explicitly include statements about DEI, have DEI-dedicated editorial board members, or present any information about how the peer-review process ensures DEI. Clear commitments and mission statements from journals could assist with formalizing processes and bolstering transparency. JMIR Dermatology has now invited >50% women dermatologists to its editorial board [6]. If the journal’s goals are not ultimately reached, conducting investigations into the reasons underlying lower acceptances among applications from women will be important [6]. Given current data trends, proactive strategies such as these are urgently needed to recruit, promote, and retain women dermatologists in academic settings. Regular monitoring and assessment can help identify foci for improvement and demand accountability. Thus, intentional work to establish expanded frameworks, criteria, and recommending actionable strategies across journals will be a crucial component of broadening DEI and presents a worthwhile goal for further research.