International Journal of Epidemiology peer reviewers: global and gender distribution
Masukume, G.; Gonzalez-Alvarez, J.; Grech, V.
Show abstract
The science of epidemiology studies and analyses the patterns, distributions and determinants of health-related entities. Peer review is crucial to the biomedical journal ecosystem. Furthermore, gender inequality persists in science and improving gender representation is a key international goal. For these reasons, we evaluated the geographical location and gender distribution of the International Journal of Epidemiology peer reviewers for 2018. There were 695 peer reviewers hailing from 41 countries. 77% (533) of the reviewers were from 20% (8) of these countries, a classical 80:20 Pareto distrubution. 41% (282) of peer reviewers were female. Although in line with the general underrepresentation of females reported in the literature, this proportion was much closer to parity than in other fields. Our investigation of peer reviewer epidemiology demonstrates geographical and gender inequalities that can be further improved since diversity promotes innovation and a greater possibility for solving complex problems.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 93%
- A systematic examination of preprint platforms for use in the medical and biomedical sciences setting 89%
- Exploring Multilevel Determinants of Stillbirth: A Comprehensive Analysis Across Sub-Saharan African Countries 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Full Publication of Preprint Articles in Prevention Research: An Analysis of Publication Proportions and Results Consistency 91%
- Researcher and Clinician Preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool: A Mixed-Methods Survey and Focus Group Study 90%
- “What’s in a name?”: Using mpox as a case study to understand the importance of communication, advocacy, and information accuracy in disease nomenclature 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Systematic Examination of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) Usage Guidelines for Scholarly Publishing in Medical Journals 92%
- Checklists to Detect Potential Predatory Biomedical Journals: A Systematic Review 91%
- Ethnic and socioeconomic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: prospective cohort study using UK Biobank 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.