No abstract

Introduction-Publication and peer review are fundamental to career advancement in science and academic medicine. Studies demonstrate that women are underrepresented in science publishing. We evaluated the gender distribution of contributors to Wilderness & Environmental Medicine (WEM) from 2010 through 2019.Methods-We extracted author data from ScienceDirect, reviewer data from the WEM Editorial Manager database, and editorial board data from journal records. Gender (female and male) was classified using automated probability-based assessment with Genderize.io software.Results-A total of 2297 unique authors were published over the 10-y span, generating 3613 authorships, of which gender was classified for 96% (n=3480). Women represented 26% (n=572) of all authors, which breaks down to 22% of all, 19% of first, 28% of second, and 18% of last authorships. Women represented 20% of peer reviewers (508/2517), 20% of reviewers-in-training (19/72), and 16% of editorial board members (7/45). The proportion of female authors, first authors, and reviewers increased over time. Women received fewer invitations per reviewer than men (mean 2.1 [95% CI 2.0-2.3] vs 2.4 [95% CI 2.3-2.5]; P=0.004), accepted reviews at similar rates (mean 73 vs 71%; P=0.214), and returned reviews 1.4 d later (mean 10.4 [CI 9.5-11.3] vs 9.0 d [95% CI 8.5-9.6]; P=0.005).Conclusions-While female representation increased over the study period, women comprise a minority of WEM authors, peer reviewers, and editorial board members. Gender equity could be improved by identifying and eliminating barriers to participation, addressing any potential bias in review processes, implementing strategies to increase female-authored submissions, and increasing mentorship and training.

Introduction-Despite near gender parity for women entering medical careers, women remain underrepresented in medical societies. This study evaluated the gender distribution associated with Wilderness Medical Society (WMS) activities.Methods-A retrospective review was performed on the gender breakdown of the following WMS members: a single-day 2020 snapshot, conference attendees 2012 through 2020, conference presenters from winter 2017 through winter 2021, and leadership and awards data from 1984 through 2021. Genderize.io was used to generate probability-based gender categorizations (male/female) based on first names or pronoun associations.Results-Gender was assigned in 91% (4043/4461) of 2020 WMS members, 92% (6179/6720) of 2012-2020 conference attendees, and 100% of remaining categories. Women represented 28% (1143/ 4043) of members, 27% (1679/6179) of conference attendees, 31% (143/465) of all conference presenters, 20% (62/303) of mainstage presenters, 23% (17/75) of all board members, 38% (14/37) of committee chairs, and 10% (2/20) of board presidents. Women received 18% (42/228) of recognition awards and 31% (15/48) of research grants issued.Conclusions-Although women comprise a minority of WMS participants, gender distribution was similar across categories for membership, conference presenters, total board positions, and research grant awards. Relative underrepresentation was seen in the highest leadership levels, in recognition awards, and in mainstage presenters. Ongoing auditing may help to identify and address sources of bias and/or barriers to participation. Although it is only one of many components of equity, identifying successes and future opportunities for gender balance can strengthen the base of the WMS, promote growth, and ensure a strong leadership pipeline.

No abstract

No abstract