IS THERE A SEX BIAS IN CHOOSING EDITORS - EPIDEMIOLOGY JOURNALS AS ANEXAMPLE

Context.-Editors, authors, and reviewers are influential in shaping sc ience. The careers of women in public health have received less scruti ny than those of women in medicine and other branches of science. The performance of women as editors, authors, and reviewers in epidemiolog y has not been previously studied. Objective.-To examine changes over time in the representation of women at the editorial level in US epide miology journals compared with the proportion of women authors and rev iewers. Design and Setting.-Cross-sectional study of 4 US epidemiology journals, American Journal of Epidemiology, Annals of Epidemiology, E pidemiology, and the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (formerly the Jo urnal of Chronic Diseases), for 1982, 1987, 1992, and 1994. Subjects.- Editors, authors, and reviewers for the selected years. Main Outcome M easures.-Sex of editors, authors, and reviewers. Results.-We identifie d 2415 reports associated with 8005 authors. One of 7 editors in chief was a woman, a position she shared with a man. For all journals, the proportion of editors who were women ranged from 5 (6.5%) of 77 in 198 2 to 42 (16.3%) of 258 in 1994. Over all journals and all years, women comprised a higher proportion of authors (28.7% [2225/7743]) compared with reviewers (26.7% [796/2982]) or editors (12.8% [89/696]). Conclu sions.-Fewer women in public health hold editorial positions than are authors and reviewers. The reasons for this important discrepancy, inc luding the possibility of a selection bias favoring men, should be fur ther investigated.