Analysis of Repeated Roles in Editorial Boards at Oncology-Focused Journals

INTRODUCTION In medical journals, editorial board members are crucial to the process of reviewing and/or accepting submitted publications. Editorial team members will need to put in time and effort to review submissions, so it's important to provide them adequate time to provide unbiased constructive feedback. Having multiple editorial roles can lead to biased selection of papers, low review quality, burnout, and a lack of diversity. It is unknown how frequently editorial team members in oncology-focused journals have multiple editorial positions.

METHODS We conducted an analysis for a total of total of 73 journals with impact factor (IF) ≥10 and an average of ≥ 20 oncology related manuscripts per year in the period of 2016-2020. Information about the editorial team members was collected from the journal's website and editorial team members affiliated institutions. Repeated roles defined as more than one role in different included journals

RESULTS A total of 5833 editorial roles were identified and analyzed. 3979 (68%) of the 58833 roles were carried by men, 3572 (61%) were for members located in the U.S, and 93.76% (5468) were carried by members with high-income country affiliations. Repeated roles (n=1101, 19%) were carried by 488 editorial team members. Repeated roles ranged from 2 to 6 roles for each of these 488 members. [Table] Most editorial members with repeated roles carried either 2 roles (80%) or 3 roles (17%), however 18 (3%) editorial members carried ≥4 roles at different journals. A total of 23% of editors-in-chief carried another editorial role at a different journal. Repeated roles occurred more frequently in men and were more frequent in authors with certain institutions affiliations.

CONCLUSIONS A considerable number of editorial team members had multiple roles across various journals, including members serving as editors in chief in oncology-focused journals. Such repeated roles limit appropriate representation and hinders diversity in academia.

No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.