Bridges of perspectives: representation of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury in editorial boards and peer review.
Editorial review
Inclusivity
Peer review
Research integrity
Spinal cord injury
Journal
Research integrity and peer review
ISSN: 2058-8615
Titre abrégé: Res Integr Peer Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676020
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Sep 2023
21 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
19
04
2023
accepted:
10
08
2023
medline:
21
9
2023
pubmed:
21
9
2023
entrez:
20
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Diversity among editorial boards and in the peer review process maximizes the likelihood that the dissemination of reported results is both relevant and respectful to readers and end users. Past studies have examined diversity among editorial board members and reviewers for factors such as gender, geographic location, and race, but limited research has explored the representation of people with disabilities. Here, we sought to understand the landscape of inclusivity of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury specifically in journals publishing papers (2012-2022) on their quality of life. An open and closed 12-question adaptive survey was disseminated to 31 journal editors over a one-month period beginning December 2022. We received 10 fully completed and 5 partially completed survey responses (response rate 48%). Notwithstanding the small sample, over 50% (8/15) of respondents indicated that their journal review practices involve people with lived experience of spinal cord injury, signaling positive even if incomplete inclusivity practices. The most notable reported barriers to achieving this goal related to identifying and recruiting people with lived experience to serve in the review and editorial process. In this study we found positive but incomplete trends toward inclusivity in journal practices involving people with lived experience of spinal cord injury. We recommend, therefore, that explicit and genuine efforts are directed toward recruitment through community-based channels. To improve representation even further, we suggest that editors and reviewers be offered the opportunity to self-identify as living with a disability without discrimination or bias.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Diversity among editorial boards and in the peer review process maximizes the likelihood that the dissemination of reported results is both relevant and respectful to readers and end users. Past studies have examined diversity among editorial board members and reviewers for factors such as gender, geographic location, and race, but limited research has explored the representation of people with disabilities. Here, we sought to understand the landscape of inclusivity of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury specifically in journals publishing papers (2012-2022) on their quality of life.
METHODS
METHODS
An open and closed 12-question adaptive survey was disseminated to 31 journal editors over a one-month period beginning December 2022.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We received 10 fully completed and 5 partially completed survey responses (response rate 48%). Notwithstanding the small sample, over 50% (8/15) of respondents indicated that their journal review practices involve people with lived experience of spinal cord injury, signaling positive even if incomplete inclusivity practices. The most notable reported barriers to achieving this goal related to identifying and recruiting people with lived experience to serve in the review and editorial process.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In this study we found positive but incomplete trends toward inclusivity in journal practices involving people with lived experience of spinal cord injury. We recommend, therefore, that explicit and genuine efforts are directed toward recruitment through community-based channels. To improve representation even further, we suggest that editors and reviewers be offered the opportunity to self-identify as living with a disability without discrimination or bias.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37730666
doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00138-0
pii: 10.1186/s41073-023-00138-0
pmc: PMC10512589
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
12Subventions
Organisme : Government of Canada New Frontiers in Research Fund (NFRF)
ID : NFRFT-2020-00238
Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Harzing AW, Metz I. Practicing what we preach. Manag Int Rev. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-011-0124-x .
doi: 10.1007/s11575-011-0124-x
Bhaumik S, Jagnoor J. Diversity in the editorial boards of global health journals. BMJ Glob Health. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001909 .
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001909
Akers KG, Pionke JJ, Aaronson EM, Chambers T, Cyrus JW, Eldermire ERB, Norton MJ. Racial, gender, sexual, and disability identities of the journal of the medical library Association’s Editorial Board, Reviewers, and authors. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2021.1216 .
doi: 10.5195/jmla.2021.1216
Bancroft SF, Ryoo K, Miles M. Promoting equity in the peer review process of journal publication. Sci Educ. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.217331248 .
doi: 10.1002/sce.217331248
Silbiger NJ, Stubler AD. Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM. PeerJ. 2019. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8247 .
doi: 10.7717/peerj.8247
Iezzoni LI. Explicit disability Bias in peer review. Med Care. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000889 .
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000889
Palser ER, Lazerwitz M, Fotopoulou A. Gender and geographical disparity in editorial boards of journals in psychology and neuroscience. Nat Neurosci. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-022-01012-w .
doi: 10.1038/s41593-022-01012-w
Rouan JR, Kibbe MR. Need for better diversity among editorial boards of surgery journals. Surgery. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.01.023 .
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.01.023
Yip SW, Rashid MA. Editorial diversity in medical education journals. Clin Teach. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13386 .
doi: 10.1111/tct.13386
Shim RS, Tully LM, Yu G, Monterozza EC, Blendermann M. Race and ethnicity of editorial board members and editors as an indicator of structural racism in psychiatry and neuroscience journals. JAMA Psychiatry. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.1983 .
doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.1983
Goyanes M. Editorial boards in communication sciences journals: plurality or standardization? Int Commun Gaz. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048518825322 .
doi: 10.1177/1748048518825322
The Lancet Psychiatry. Editorial boards of the future. Lancet Psychiat. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30532-0 .
doi: 10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30532-0
World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/spinal-cord-injury . Accessed 31 July 2023.
National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center. https://www.nscisc.uab.edu/public/Facts%20and%20Figures%202023%20-%20Final.pdf . Accessed 1 Aug 2023.
Frieden L, Winnegar AJ. Opportunities for research to improve employment for people with spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2012.38 .
doi: 10.1038/sc.2012.38
Hammell KR. Spinal cord injury rehabilitation research: patient priorities, current deficiencies and potential directions. Disabil Rehabil. 2010. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638280903420325 .
doi: 10.3109/09638280903420325
Abma TA. Patient participation in health research: research with and for people with spinal cord injuries. Qual Health Res. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305282382 .
doi: 10.1177/1049732305282382
Anderson KD. Targeting recovery: priorities of the spinal cord-injured population. J Neurotrauma. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371 .
doi: 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371
Musselman KE, Papadimitriou C, Vasilchenko E, Editorial. Community reintegration after spinal cord injury. Front Rehabil Sci. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2022.1020279 .
doi: 10.3389/fresc.2022.1020279
Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, Gülmezoglu AM, Howells DW, Ioannidis JP, Oliver S. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62229-1 .
doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62229-1
Abma TA. Patients as partners in a health research agenda setting: the feasibility of a participatory methodology. Eval Health Prof. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278706293406 .
doi: 10.1177/0163278706293406
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs. https://cdmrp.health.mil/scirp/default . Accessed 4 April 2023.
White R, Eijnden M, Donskoy AL, Rajkumar V, Kemmer D, Stoyanova R. Lived experience involvement in research funding: taking a more systematic approach. Nat Mental Health. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-023-00029-9 .
doi: 10.1038/s44220-023-00029-9
Nuechterlein A, Barretto T, Yehia A, Illes J. Survey questions and data. OSFHOME. 2022. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/6TGK2 .
doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6TGK2
Eysenbach, Gunther. Improving the quality of web surveys: the Checklist for reporting results of internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res. 2004. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34 .
doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e34
Nuechterlein A, Feng L, Yehia A, Illes J. Strengths, gaps, and future directions on the landscape of ethics-related research for spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2023; in press.
Canadian Institues of Health Research. https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/41204.html . Accessed 31 July 2023.
Moore M, Disability. Who counts? What counts? Disabil Soc. 2015; doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2015.1061772 .
Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/reviewers-update/how-to-become-a-reviewer . Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Wiley Author Services. https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/becoming-a-reviewer.html/index.html . Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Simpson E, Sawatzky B, Forwell S, Backman CL, Symington D, Vu M, Mortenson WB. A mixed-methods study exploring and comparing the experiences of people who sustained a spinal cord injury earlier versus later in life. Spinal Cord. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00767-0 .
doi: 10.1038/s41393-022-00767-0
Rastogi S. Establishing equity in medical education — supporting clinical trainees with disabilities. N Engl J Med. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp2035279 .
doi: 10.1056/nejmp2035279
Dewidar O, Elmestekawy N, Welch V. Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2022; doi:1186/s41073-022-00123-z.
Hoekstra F, Schaefer L, Athanasopoulos P, Gainforth HL. Researchers’ and research users’ experiences with and reasons for working together in spinal cord injury research partnerships: a qualitative study. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021. https://doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2021.35 .
doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.35
Whiteneck GG, Harrison-Felix CL, Mellick DC, Brooks CA, Charlifue SB, Gerhart KA. Quantifying environmental factors: a measure of physical, attitudinal, service, productivity, and policy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.09.027 .
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.09.027
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/53122.html . Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/meet-elseviers-new-disability-confidence-manager .Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/about/inclusion-and-diversity . Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/authors/policies-and-guidelines/edi . Accessed 4 Apr 2023.
Fox CW, Albert AYK, Vines TH. Recruitment of reviewers is becoming harder at some journals: a test of the influence of reviewer fatigue at six journals in ecology and evolution. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-017-0027-x .
doi: 10.1186/s41073-017-0027-x
Hoekstra F, Gainforth HL. SCI Guiding principles consensus panel. Principles and related strategies for spinal cord injury research partnership approaches: a qualitative study. Evid Policy. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426421X16161715996124 .
doi: 10.1332/174426421X16161715996124