Significance Empirical evidence suggests that non-White scientists experience various forms of inequality, creating barriers to their entry and participation in academic research. We contribute to this literature by examining disparities in i) editorial board representation, ii) time spent under review, and iii) citation rates. Using a dataset of 1,000,000 papers from six publishers over the past two decades, we find fewer non-White editors than would be expected based on their share of authorship. Moreover, non-White scientists endure longer waiting times between the submission and acceptance of their manuscripts, and upon publication, their papers receive fewer citations than would be expected based on textual similarity. These findings highlight ways through which non-White scientists suffer from inequalities, potentially hindering their academic careers.

Non-White scientists appear on fewer editorial boards, spend more time under review, and receive fewer citations

BACKGROUND
While progress is evident in gender and ethnic representation in the workplace, this disparity remains prevalent in academic positions.


OBJECTIVES
We examined gender and Asian ethnic representation in editorial boards of cardiology journals.


METHODS
A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using publicly available data on Cardiology and Cardiovascular medicine journals in first quartile of the 2020 Scimago Journal & Country Rank indicator. The proportions of female and Asian editorial board members, associate editors and editors-in-chief were assessed. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the journal's geographical origin, subspecialty, and demographic of the editor-in-chief.


RESULTS
Seventy-six cardiology journals, involving 8915 editorial board members, were included. Only 19.6% of editorial board members were female, 20.8% Asians, and 4.0% Asian females. There were less female representation amongst editors-in-chief (9.9%) compared to associate editors (22.3%). European (18.1%) and North American-based journals (21.1%) had higher female representation compared to Asian-based journals (8.7%). There was lower Asian representation in European (18.1%) and North American-based journals (19.9%) compared to Asian-based journals (72.3%). Females were underrepresented in interventional (14.5%) journals, while Asians were underrepresented in general cardiology (18.3%) and heart failure (18.3%) journals. Journals led by female editors-in-chief had significantly higher female representation compared to male-led ones, while journals with Asian editors-in-chief had greater Asian representation compared to non-Asian led ones.


CONCLUSION
This study highlights the female and Asian ethnic underrepresentation in academic roles in cardiology journal editorial boards. Further analysis is needed for other ethnicities, while the community pushes towards gender-balanced and ethnic diversity across editorial boards.

Harpreet Singh

Papers

Disparity in Female and Asian Representation Amongst Cardiology Journal Editorial Boards Members: A Call for Empowerment.