ArticleIndian journal of occupational and environmental medicine
A Cross-Sectional Study on the Representation of Women as Editors in MEDLINE-Indexed Occupational Health and Safety Journals.
Article in Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite progress, gender gaps persist in editorial leadership. This study explores the extent of women's representation on editorial boards of occupational health and safety journals indexed in MEDLINE and discusses the potential implications of underrepresentation for scientific discourse and research visibility. Methods: This study presents a cross-sectional analysis of MEDLINE-indexed occupational health and safety (OSH) journals to assess gender representation across editorial roles and examine associations with journal characteristics using Spearman correlation. Objectives include: (i) quantifying female participation across editorial positions, (ii) examining associations with journal characteristics (e.g., impact factor, editor-in-chief gender), and (iii) identifying barriers to women's inclusion. A structured search of the NLM Catalog was conducted on May 16, 2024 using MeSH terms for "occupational health" and "occupational medicine." Eligible journals had OSH as their primary focus and publicly listed editorial boards. Data on editorial roles were extracted manually and analyzed using the Composite Editorial Board Diversity Score. All data were independently verified. No direct contact was made, and ethical approval was not required as only publicly available data were used. Results: Among 1215 editors across 32 journals, women comprised 39%. Female representation rose with journal impact factor (Spearman Conclusions: This study reveals underrepresentation of women on OSH journal editorial boards, raising concerns of bias and limited perspectives, indicating that appointing women to top roles alone does not yield gender-equitable boards and that systemic measures remain necessary. Persistent underrepresentation likely reflects structural barriers; interpretations are noncausal given the cross-sectional design. Addressing these gaps is vital for promoting equity and inclusivity in occupational health research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.