Evaluating Editor-in-Chief Diversity in High-Impact Plastic Surgery Journals: A 20-Journal Analysis.

Background: Lack of diversity in medical research is a growing concern. Editorial boards play a significant role in shaping scientific discourse; thus, it is imperative that they convey a variety of perspectives. This study examines editorial boards of the top 20 plastic surgery journals, focusing on the demographic and academic backgrounds of editors-in-chief.

Methods: Editorial boards of the top 20 plastic surgery journals by impact factor were reviewed for editor-in-chief information through journal websites and public sources. Information on demographic characteristics, academic background, years since training completion, and leadership were collected by 2 independent reviewers. H-indices were obtained from the Scopus database.

Results: Among 15 editors-in-chief, 93.3% were male (n = 14), and 6.7% were female (n = 1); 66.7% of editors-in-chief were White (n = 10), and 33.3% were Asian (n = 5). Mean years since training completion was 26.6 ± 10.3 years. Furthermore, 66.7% of editors-in-chief held an MD (n = 10), 26.7% held an MD and PhD (n = 4), and 6.7% held a master's degree and PhD (n = 1). Editors-in-chief residency training backgrounds included 6.7% trained in general surgery (n = 1), 33.3% trained in plastic surgery (n = 5), 26.7% trained in both general and plastic surgery (n = 4), and 26.7% trained in other specialties (n = 4). All editors-in-chief held professorship positions, 53.3% held chair positions (n = 8), 60.0% served as current or past society presidents (n = 9), and 60.0% held director roles (n = 9).

Conclusion: This study highlights limited gender and racial diversity among plastic surgery journal editors-in-chief. Efforts must continue to address this issue and promote diversity in leadership roles.