How international are the editorial boards in the field of foot and ankle surgery?: A STROBE-compliant cross-sectional study

Abstract

Very low proportions of publications from low- and middle-income countries (LAMIC) have been proved in multiple fields. Some researchers from these countries believe that there is a biased attitude of editors against their studies. Under-representation of editorial board members from LAMIC were revealed in many research fields. However, it has not been investigated in the field of foot and ankle surgery. The current study aimed to analyze the composition of the editorial board members in leading foot and ankle journals, and to provide the international representation of editorial boards in the field of foot and ankle surgery. Five leading journals in the field of foot and ankle surgery were included. The editorial board members were collected from the official websites of these journals. The countries of board members were classified based on World Bank. The board compositions of the journals were analyzed. In total, 229 editorial board members were identified. These editors were from 29 countries. The United States (29.69%) had the greatest number of editors, followed by the United Kingdom (20.52%), Australia (8.30%), Italy (6.11%), and Germany (5.68%). When the editors were classified by regions, 49.34% of board members were from Europe & Central Asia, followed by North America (31.44%), East Asia & Pacific (14.41%), Latin America & Caribbean (2.62%), and Middle East & North Africa (2.18%). No editors were from South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. A total of 217 editors (94.76%) were from high-income countries, followed by upper-middle-income countries (3.06%), and lower-middle-income countries (2.18%). No members were from low-income countries. There is a lack of international representation on editorial boards of leading foot and ankle journals. Editorial board members in the field of foot and ankle surgery are largely composed by editors from high-income countries with sever under-representation of LAMIC.

Composition of the editorial staff of major spinal journals based on geo-economic background: A survey analysis

“…Notably, between 2004 and 2013, nearly 100 countries collectively authored over 13,000 papers in major spinal journals, underlining the global impact of spinal research [ 10 ]. Researchers publish their findings as an essential part of the research process, facilitating the dissemination of new findings, a crucial element for advancing both basic research and clinical practice [ 42 , 43 ]. The editorial boards, as the core of the journals, wield significant influence over current publications and future directions [ 27 , 28 , 30 , 36 , 38 , 39 ].…”

“…However, it should be acknowledged that the causes for the underrepresentation of LAMIE are multifaceted. Initially, the predominance of English in top spine journals necessitates a high level of English proficiency among ESM, posing a challenge for many editors from non-English speaking LAMIE [ [42] , [43] , [44] ]. Moreover, researchers linked to these areas might have limited exposure to the comprehensive experience typically needed to perform effective editorial work for prominent journals [ 34 , 42 , 43 ].…”

Analyzing the composition of the editorial boards in high-impact medical ethics journals: a survey study

“…This research employed a content analysis of journal websites and was exempt from Institutional Review Board approval due to the absence of human or animal subjects. The research methodology employed in this study was based on similar publications within the disciplines of paediatrics, psychiatry, foot and ankle surgery, and spine [ 14 , 15 , 28 , 29 ]. For the identification of relevant medical ethics journals, the Journal Citation Reports from 2021 were consulted, culminating in the selection of sixteen high-impact journals, as detailed in Table 1 .…”

“…Studies indicate that editorial bias may contribute to the low proportion of papers from authors affiliated with LMICs [ 14 , 26 , 27 ]. The composition of editorial board members (EBM), which shapes the personality, policy, and preferred content of journals, can introduce inherent biases [ 14 , 28 , 29 ]. The cultural predominance of high-income countries (HICs) potentially influences the focus and content of these journals, often leading to a preponderance of publications concerning conditions prevalent in HICs and fewer studies addressing healthcare issues in LMICs [ 30 – 33 ].…”

“…Assessing the international representation within editorial teams, specifically the composition of EBM in prominent medical ethics journals, is thus imperative [ 14 – 16 , 35 ]. Previous studies have highlighted a significant underrepresentation of EBM from LMICs across various medical fields [ 14 , 15 , 26 , 28 – 31 ], yet the extent of this phenomenon within medical ethics journals remains underexplored. Therefore, the present study aimed to analyze the EBM composition in major medical ethics journals and shed light on the international representation of editorial staff in this crucial domain of medical ethics.…”