What can a journal editorial team do to strive for equity in health professions education publishing? Leading by example

被引:0
|
作者
Cianciolo, Anna T. [1 ]
Konopasky, Abigail [2 ]
Jain, Neera R. [3 ]
Wyatt, Tasha R. [4 ]
Ibrahim, Halah [5 ]
Chow, Candace J. [6 ]
Andon, Anabelle [7 ]
Torre, Dario [8 ]
Naidu, Thirusha [9 ]
机构
[1] Southern Illinois Univ, Sch Med, POB 19681, Springfield, IL 62794 USA
[2] Geisel Sch Med Dartmouth, Hanover, NH USA
[3] Univ Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Auckland, New Zealand
[4] Uniformed Serv Univ Hlth Sci, Bethesda, MD USA
[5] Khalifa Univ, Coll Med & Hlth Sci, Abu Dhabi, U Arab Emirates
[6] Univ Utah, Spencer Fox Eccles Sch Med, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[7] Columbia Univ, Vagelos Coll Phys & Surg, New York, NY USA
[8] Univ Cent Florida, Coll Med, Orlando, FL USA
[9] Univ KwaZulu Natal, Durban, South Africa
关键词
Academic publishing; social justice; diversity; equity; and inclusion; epistemic justice;
D O I
10.1080/0142159X.2024.2425026
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
What was the Educational Challenge?Representation gaps in medical education publishing are widely recognized and may be attributed to epistemic injustice, defined as 'wrong done to someone in their capacity as a knower.' Although peer review is meant to ensure 'rigor,' some quality assurance practices can inadvertently silence entire populations and impede understanding of a field's foundational concepts.What was the Proposed Solution?To honor our journal's commitment to equitable knowledge production, a diversity, equity, and inclusion working group at Teaching and Learning in Medicine (TLM) reimagined rigor to include striving for a 'more equitable, diverse, and inclusive research system.'How was the Proposed Solution Implemented?We implemented structural peer review reform at TLM by adapting Hogan et al.'s Dimensionality and R4P framework for health equity, prioritizing change in our communication with contributors.What Lessons Learned are Relevant to a Wider Audience?Since implementation, our journal has received feedback expressing appreciation for humanity and personal connection in our peer review, and we have observed increased publications from geographically marginalized authors. We believe our outcomes result from respecting marginalized authors' authority to pursue their own interests, concerns, and successes with respect to knowledge production.What are the Next Steps?We believe our approach can be adopted by other peer-reviewed journals. We invite application and critique of our framework to advance community development in creating relevant, accessible, and equitable knowledge production for all people.
引用
收藏
页数:3
相关论文
共 25 条