technical paper
Assessment of Neurology's Implementation of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Editorial Review of Research Manuscripts | VIDEO
keywords:
editorial policies
editorial and peer review process
diversity and inclusion
Objective In 2019, Neurology appointed 2 equity, diversity,
and inclusion (EDI) editors to review manuscripts dealing
with sex and gender, race and ethnicity, and other categories
of marginalization. 1,2 Manuscripts requiring EDI review are
identified by the EDI editor by title review or selected by the
handling editor during the review process. The EDI review is
obtained only for manuscripts that are being considered for
publication if suitably revised. Final editorial decisions are
made considering the EDI reviews and the responses from
the authors. The objectives of this retrospective analysis were
to describe the outcomes of the process and highlight the
issues identified by the EDI editors.
Design For this mixed methods study, the research articles
that were reviewed by the EDI editors between May 1, 2019,
and December 31, 2021, were identified. For this analysis, 75
of these manuscripts were selected at random. Two raters
with expertise in EDI issues read the reviews and classified
the issues raised by the EDI reviewers as related to
terminology or conceptual issues in reference to sex and
gender, race or ethnicity, or other marginalization categories.
The analysis was limited to initial reviews. The data were
summarized with descriptive statistics.
Results In the study time frame, 7841 research articles were
submitted to the journal. The EDI editors reviewed 101
manuscripts (1.3%). After evaluating the 75 reviews selected
for analysis, 2 were excluded because the EDI editor reviewed
them as a topic expert and not for EDI concerns. Among the
73 papers included in the analysis, the EDI reviewers
identified at least 1 terminology or conceptual issue in 64,
and there were at least 2 issues in 41 manuscripts. In relation
to sex and gender, the EDI editors identified terminology and
conceptual issues in 23 and 19 manuscripts, respectively; the
matching numbers in relation to race or ethnicity were 23
and 56; and for other categories, 6 manuscripts had
conceptual issues. The main themes identified during the EDI
review process are presented in Table 5. As of May 31, 2022,
45 of the 73 manuscripts in the analysis had been accepted, 27 had
been rejected, and 1 was undergoing major revision. The
proportion of rejected manuscripts was lower for those in
which an issue was identified by the EDI editor (22 of 64 vs 5
of 9; difference, 22%; 95% CI, −9.4% to 49.5%).
Conclusions The EDI editors identified several conceptual
and nomenclature issues spanning various themes. The fact
that the proportion of rejected manuscripts was lower when
EDI concerns were identified suggests that the authors were
able to address the concerns raised. The implementation of
EDI review led to identification and substantive corrections
related to categories of marginalization in manuscripts
submitted to Neurology.
References
1. Baskin PK, Pieper KM, Gross RA. Efforts by the
journal to promote perspectives of equity, diversity, and
inclusion and address disparities. Neurology.
2019;93(12):521-522. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000008021
2. Hamilton RH, Hinson HE. Introducing the associate
editors for equity, diversity, and inclusion: aligning editorial
leadership with core values in Neurology®. Neurology.
2019;93(15):651-652. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000008235
1 Neurology, Minneapolis, MN, USA, jose.g.merino@gunet.
georgetown.edu; 2 Department of Neurology, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 3 Department of Neurology,
Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA;
4 Department of Neurology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston,
MA, USA; 5 Department of Neurology, University of California, San
Francisco, CA, USA; 6 Department of Neurology, University of
Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA; 7 Department of Pharmacology
and Physiology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA;
8 Department of Neurology, Georgetown University Medical Center,
Washington, DC, USA
Conflict of Interest Disclosures Roy H. Hamilton
receives salary support from the American Academy of
Neurology for his role as associate editor for Equity,
Diversity, and Inclusion. H. E. Hinson receives salary support
from the American Academy of Neurology for her role as
associate editor for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. She
consults for Biogen and conducts research supported by
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke grant
1K23NS110828. Joshua A. Budhu receives salary support
from the American
Academy of Neurology for his role as section editor for
Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, and Social Justice.
The Commonwealth Fund provides salary and research
support. Nicole Rosendale receives research support from the
American Academy of Neurology. Patricia K. Baskin’s salary
is paid by the American Academy of Neurology. José G.
Merino receives salary support from the American Academy
of Neurology for his role as editor in chief of Neurology. No
other disclosures were reported.
Additional Information Roy H. Hamilton and H. E.
Hinson are co–first authors.