Rationale and Objectives
We examined female representation on editorial boards of four prominent radiology journals. We compared editorial board representation to female academic radiology career advancement and the proportion of female authorship in three journals over four decades.
Methods
We collected data on the gender of editorial board members as listed on mastheads of Radiology, American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR), Academic Radiology , and the Journal of the American College of Radiology in 5-year intervals plus the most recent year available (1973–2017), and the gender of their editors-in-chief for all years since each journal’s inception. We compared Radiology, AJR , and Academic Radiology data to published data on gender of the journals’ authors, all US medical students, and academic radiologists over time.
Results
Gender was determined for 171 editors-in-chief (100%) and 2139 (100%) editorial board members listed in the selected journals for each of the study years. The proportion of women on editorial boards increased from 1.4% (1 of 69) in 1978 to 18.8% (73 of 388) in 2013 ( P < .001), but remained below the proportion of female first authors (7.5% in 1978 and 27.1% in 2013) and female faculty in radiology (11.5% in 1978 and 28.1% in 2013). None of the four general radiology journals had a female editor-in-chief during the study period.
Conclusions
Female representation on editorial boards has increased over time, but still lags behind increases seen in female first authorship in radiology journals and radiology faculty appointments over the last four decades. There was no female editor-in-chief during the study period.
Introduction
Medical journal editorial board appointments, including becoming editor-in-chief, are indicators of professional achievement and are often influenced by research and national leadership prominence. Editors, reviewers, and authors have influence over the scientific community and, therefore, lead the direction of scientific advancement and health policy . Academic advancement and leadership roles in medicine are important to career fulfillment and impact, but historically have been obtained by more men than women, raising concern for gender bias .
While women in leadership positions are important role models for younger women , recent studies suggest that the higher the leadership rank, the fewer the women. For example, a 1994 study of editors-in-chief of 100 high-impact-factor clinical medicine journals found only four women and suggested that lack of female role models and gender bias were potential causes for this gender gap . In 2015, section heads and vice chairs of academic radiology departments were three times more likely to be male, and 91% of departmental chairpersons were male .
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Methods
Data Sources
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 1
List of All Editors-in-Chief for Four Leading General Radiology Journals
Journal Editor-in-Chief Years_Radiology_ Maximilian John Hubeny 1924–1930 Leon J Menville 1931–1940 Howard P Doub 1941–1965 William R Eyler 1966–1985 Stanley Siegelman 1986–1997 Anthony Proto 1998–2007 Herbert Kressel 2008–2017 David A. Bluemke 2018AJR Melvin M Figley 1976–1985 Robert N Berk 1986–1995 Lee F Roberts 1996–2003 Robert Stanley 2004–2007 Thomas H Berquist 2008–2018Academic Radiology Bruce J Hillman 1994–1997 Edmund A Franken, Jr 1998–1999 Stanley Baum 2000–2017 N. Reed Dunnick 2018JACR Bruce J Hillman 2004–2018
AJR, American Journal of Roentgenology; JACR, Journal of the American College of Radiology .
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Statistical Analysis
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Results
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 2
Female Representation on the Editorial Boards of American General Radiology Journals by Year (1973–2017)
Journal 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 2017P Value \* Radiology Total number of editorial board members 36 48 36 106 115 116 103 111 151 144 .001 Number of female editorial board members (%) 0 0 2 (5.6) 7 (6.6) 12 (10.4) 19 (16.4) 14 (13.6) 14 (13.6) 17 (11.3) 28 (19.4) Gender of editor-in-chief M M M M M M M M M_AJR_ Total number of editorial board members NA 21 19 33 48 54 102 109 94 101 <.001 Number of female editorial board members NA 1 (4.8) 1 (5.3) 0 3 (6.3) 5 (9.3) 17 (16.7) 17 (15.6) 23 (24.5) 29 (28.7) Gender of editor-in-chief NA M M M M M M M M M_Academic Radiology_ Total number of editorial board members NA NA NA NA NA 76 82 92 98 109 .57 Number of female editorial board members (%) NA NA NA NA NA 14 (18.4) 16 (19.5) 16 (17.4) 19 (19.4) 24 (22.0) Gender of editor-in-chief NA NA NA NA NA M M M M M_JACR_ Total number of editorial board members NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 44 45 46 .05 Number of female editorial board members (%) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 (18.2) 13 (28.9) 17 (37.0) Gender of editor-in-chief NA NA NA NA NA NA NA M M M Total number female/Total number (%) 0/36 (0) 1/69 (1.4) 3/55 (5.5) 7/139 (5.0) 15/163 (9.2) 38/246 (15.4) 47/287 (16.4) 58/356 (16.3) 73/388 (18.8) 98/400 (24.5) <.001
AJR, American Journal of Roentgenology; JACR, Journal of the American College of Radiology ; M, male; NA, not applicable.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
TABLE 3
Correlation Between Female Editorial Board Members and Female Representation in Medical Schools and Academic Radiology Departments
Female Editorial Board Members of Radiology r ( P ) Female Editorial Board Members of AJR r ( P ) Female Editorial Board Members of Academic Radiology r ( P ) Female authors 0.958 (.010) ** 0.684 (.203) −0.079 (.950) Female medical students 0.926 (<.001) *** 0.691 (.058) −0.234 (.766) Female faculty 0.892 (.001) ** 0.726 (.042) \* 0.023 (.977) Female chairs 0.685 (.061) 0.810 (.015) \* 0.045 (.955)
AJR, American Journal of Roentgenology .
Correlation coefficient (r) and P values in parentheses displayed above were used to examine the presence of correlation between female editors, authors, medical students, faculty in radiology, and radiology department chairs over time. We transformed the proportions of women each year into logs of odds and then used Pearson correlations. A P value <.05 was considered a significant correlation.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Discussion
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Acknowledgments
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
References
1. Dickersin K., Fredman L., Flegal K.M., et. al.: Female editorship is an important indicator of gender imbalance. J R Soc Med 2010; 103: pp. 5.
2. Forman H.P., Larson D.B., Kaye A.D., et. al.: Masters of radiology panel discussion: women in radiology—how can we encourage more women to join the field and become leaders?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 198: pp. 145-149.
3. Budden A.E., Tregenza T., Aarssen L.W., et. al.: Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends Ecol Evol (Amst) 2008; 23: pp. 4-6.
4. Hojat M., Gonnella J.S., Caelleigh A.S.: Impartial judgment by the “gatekeepers” of science: fallibility and accountability in the peer review process. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2003; 8: pp. 75-96.
5. Wenger N.K.: Women in leadership positions in the medical academic enterprise: what are the next steps?. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168: pp. 449-450.
6. Hatfield C., Ostbye T., Sori C.: Sex of editor in medical journals. Lancet 1995; 345: pp. 662.
7. Grimm L.J., Ngo J., Pisano E.D., et. al.: Men (and women) in academic radiology: how can we reduce the gender discrepancy?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206: pp. 678-680.
8. Schumpeter J.: Diversity fatigue. The Economist ; London: The Economist Group Limited2016. 1
9. Logan D.: The importance of a gender-balanced editorial team: narrowing the gender gap begins with all of us.2016.Elsevier Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/editors-update/story/publishing-trends/The-importance-of-a-gender-balanced-editorial-team
10. Campbell L.G., Mehtani S., Dozier M.E., et. al.: Gender-heterogeneous working groups produce higher quality science. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e79147
11. Campbell J.C., Yoon S.C., Cater S.W., et. al.: Factors influencing the gender breakdown of academic radiology residency programs. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14: pp. 958-962.
12. Kennedy B.L., Lin Y., Dickstein L.J.: Women on the editorial boards of major journals. Acad Med 2001; 76: pp. 849-851.
13. Bluth E.I., Bansal S., Macura K.J., et. al.: Gender and the radiology workforce: results of the 2014 ACR workforce survey. J Am Coll Radiol 2015; 12: pp. 155-157.
14. Martin C.A., Woodring J.H.: Attitudes toward women in radiology. J Am Med Womens Assoc 1986; 41: pp. 50-53.
15. Magnavita N.: Is there a gender gap in Italian radiology? A cross-sectional study. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: pp. e502-e507.
16. Wenneras C., Wold A.: Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature 1997; 387: pp. 341-343.
17. Janus C.L., Janus S.S.: Career adjustment of women radiologists. J Am Med Womens Assoc 1987; 42: pp. 54-56.
18. Kapoor N., Blumenthal D.M., Smith S.E., et. al.: Gender differences in academic rank of radiologists in U.S. Medical Schools. Radiology 2017; 283: pp. 140-147.
19. Carnes M., Morrissey C., Geller S.E.: Women’s health and women’s leadership in academic medicine: hitting the same glass ceiling?. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2008; 17: pp. 1453-1462.
20. Østergaard C.R., Timmermans B., Kristinsson K.: Does a different view create something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation. Res Policy 2011; 40: pp. 500-509.
21. Vidaver R.M., Lafleur B., Tong C., et. al.: Women subjects in NIH-funded clinical research literature: lack of progress in both representation and analysis by sex. J Womens Health Gend Based Med 2000; 9: pp. 495-504.
22. Noland M., Moran T., Kotschwar B.: Is gender diversity profitable? Evidence from a global survey. Peterson Inst Int Econ 2016; 16: pp. 1-35.
23. Leopold S.S., Beadling L., Dobbs M.B., et. al.: Fairness to all: gender and sex in scientific reporting. Clin Orthop 2014; 472: pp. 391-392.
24. Jagsi R., Guancial E.A., Worobey C.C., et. al.: The “gender gap” in authorship of academic medical literature—a 35-year perspective. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: pp. 281-287.
25. Piper C.L., Scheel J.R., Lee C.I., et. al.: Gender trends in radiology authorship: a 35-year analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206: pp. 3-7.
26. Association of American Medical Colleges. AAMC data book: statistical information related to medical schools and teaching hospitals. Washington, D.C.:AAMC 2014. Table B12 https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/999765024602121/cite
27. Association of American Medical Colleges web- site : Medical School Faculty.2014. www.aamc.org/data/facultyroster/reports/420598/usmsf14.html
28. RSNA : David A. Bluemke, MD, PhD, Named New Editor of Radiology. Available at: http://www.rsna.org/News.aspx?id=20715
29. Seltzer S.: From strength to strength, Reed Dunnick, MD: New Editor, Academic Radiology. Acad Radiol 2017; 24: pp. 789.
30. JACR : Aims and scope. Available at: http://www.jacr.org/content/aims
31. Jagsi R., Tarbell N.J., Henault L.E., et. al.: The representation of women on the editorial boards of major medical journals: a 35-year perspective. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168: pp. 544-548.
32. Gunderman R.B., Houk J.L.: The importance of role models in increasing women in radiology. Acad Radiol 2017; 24: pp. 230-231.
33. McDonald J.S., McDonald R.J., Davenport M.S., et. al.: Gender and radiology publication productivity: an examination of academic faculty from four health systems in the United States. J Am Coll Radiol 2017; 14: pp. 1100-1108.
34. Donovan A.: Views of radiology program directors on the role of mentorship in the training of radiology residents. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: pp. 704-708.
35. Hall F.M.: Celebrating the achievements of women radiologists and physicians. Radiology 2011; 261: pp. 9-11.
36. Amrein K., Langmann A., Fahrleitner-Pammer A., et. al.: Women underrepresented on editorial boards of 60 major medical journals. Gend Med 2011; 8: pp. 378-387.
37. Duch J., Zeng X.H., Sales-Pardo M., et. al.: The possible role of resource requirements and academic career-choice risk on gender differences in publication rate and impact. [Erratum appears in PLoS One. 2013;8(5). doi:10.1371/annotation/7f54a3e6-6dcf-4825-9eb9-201253cf1e25]. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: e51332