Objectives To determine the proportion and relative advancement of women in leadership positions at high‐impact otolaryngology journals. Methods Nine clinical otolaryngology journals were selected based on high impact factor and subspecialty representation (journal impact factor, 2016: 1.16–2.95). The proportion of women editorial board members associate and/or section editors, and/or editor‐in‐chief was measured from 1997 to 2017. Comparisons were made to the proportion of women otolaryngology faculty at U.S. medical schools in 2017. Results From 1997 to 2017, female editorial board membership increased from 7.2% (range: 0.0%–12.8%) to 17.7% (range: 10.9%–38.9%) (P = 0.0001). In 2017, the proportion of female editorial board members was significantly less than the proportion of female academic otolaryngology faculty (17.7% vs. 27.7%, P = 0.0001), and there was threefold variation between journals. From 1997 to 2017, the proportion of female associate and/or section editors increased from 9.3% (range: 0.0–27.3) to 20.9% (range: 5.3% to 45.5%) (P = 0.09). In 2017, the proportion of female associate and/or section editors was not significantly different than the proportion of female associate or full professor academic otolaryngology faculty (20.9% vs. 19.5%, P = 0.73), but there was ninefold variation between journals. Conclusion Women were underrepresented on eight of nine otolaryngology editorial boards but appropriately represented at the associate and/or section editorship level. There was remarkable variation in representation at individual journals, which may provide future opportunities to examine best practices. Disparity exists in leadership at the most senior level of these high‐profile otolaryngology journals: none had women editor‐in‐chiefs. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 129:2031–2035, 2019

Background No head to head comparison is available between surgical lip lifting and upper lip filler injections to decide which technique yields the best results in patients. Despite the growing popularity of upper lip augmentation, its effect on societal perceptions of attractiveness, successfulness and overall health in woman is unknown. Methods Blinded casual observers viewed three versions of independent images of 15 unique patient lower faces for a total of 45 images. Observers rated the attractiveness, perceived success, and perceived overall health for each patient image. Facial perception questions were answered on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100, where higher scores corresponded to more positive responses. Results Two hundred and seventeen random observers with an average age of 47 years (standard deviation, 15.9) rated the images. The majority of observers were females (n=183, 84%) of white race (n=174, 80%) and had at least some college education (n=202, 93%). The marginal mean score for perceived attractiveness from the natural condition was 1.5 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9–2.18) higher than perceived attractiveness from the simulated upper lip filler injection condition, and 2.6 points higher (95% CI, 1.95–3.24) than the simulated upper lip lift condition. There was a moderate to strong correlation between the scores of the same observer. Conclusions Simulated upper lip augmentation is amenable to social perception analysis. Scores of the same observer for attractiveness, successfulness, and overall health are strongly correlated. Overall, the natural condition had the highest scores in all categories, followed by simulated upper lip filler, and lastly simulated upper lip lift.

Objective To assess the reliability and construct validity of the Penetration-Aspiration Scale in children. Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of pre- and postoperative video modified barium swallow studies from children who underwent interarytenoid injection augmentation for unexplained persistent pharyngeal dysphagia. Two pediatric speech and language pathologists reviewed each study twice in a blinded and randomized fashion. Setting Tertiary academic pediatric hospital. Subjects and Methods Thirty children were identified with adequate pre- and postoperative modified barium swallow studies within 4 weeks of intervention. Children were separated into clinical outcome groups based on ability to advance to thinner diet consistencies postoperatively. Construct validity was assessed with a mixed linear model to test the hypothesis that only the clinically improved group would receive better Penetration-Aspiration Scale scores after surgery. Reliability was assessed by calculating chance-corrected agreement between raters (interrater) and raters’ repeat evaluations (intrarater). Results Inter- and intrarater reliabilities (Cohen’s κ) were both excellent. Results of the mixed model revealed a significant interaction between outcome group and pre- and postoperative time interval. As hypothesized, this involved a significant improvement in Penetration-Aspiration Scale score only in the improved group. Conclusions These findings suggest that the Penetration-Aspiration Scale is a reliable and valid measure of clinical response to interarytenoid injection augmentation in children.