Promoting inclusive metrics of success and impact to dismantle a discriminatory reward system in science

Centering relationships to place for more meaningful research and engagement

Research has the potential to simultaneously generate new knowledge and contribute meaningful social-ecological benefits; however, research processes and outcomes can also perpetuate extractive patterns that have manifested the climate, biodiversity, and social justice crises. One approach to enhance the societal value of research processes is to strengthen relationships with places of study and the peoples of those places. Deepening relational engagement with the social-ecological context and history of a place can lead to more accurate results and improved public trust in the scientific process and is particularly important for natural scientists who work at the interface of nature and society. We provide three actionable pathways that range from individual to systemic change to enhance place-based relationships within research systems: 1) deepen reflection and communication about relationships with places and peoples; 2) strengthen collaboration among research teams and partners; and 3) transform systems of knowledge creation to foster place-based roots. Action on any of these proposed pathways, but especially action taken across all three, can build empathy and connections to place and people, strengthening the meaningful impact of research both locally and globally.

Scientific priorities and relational dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study

To rapidly respond to the COVID-19 public health crisis, researchers have been called upon to prioritize pandemic research, while simultaneously modifying their existing research to maintain the safety of all stakeholders. This study aims to explore the experiences of health science researchers in their scientific practices, research priorities, and professional relational dynamics due to COVID-19. Specifically, we interviewed 31 researchers from diverse fields at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Participants worked on COVID-19, non-COVID-19 related research, or both. We integrated inductive and deductive coding using a thematic coding method. The following four themes were explored: 1) impact of research, 2) research priorities, 3) professional relationships and 4) contextual influences on science. Participants were drawn to COVID-19 work for a diversity of reasons including social need, scientific interest, professional duty, and increased access to funding opportunities. While collaborations have increased for COVID-19 researchers, interpersonal relationships have been challenging for participants. Additionally, political, familial, and personal stresses due to the pandemic have taken a toll on researchers in very different and often inequitable ways. To ensure team cohesion, there is a need to develop research practices, policies and systems that value empathy, flexibility, and interdependence.

A systematic evidence map and bibliometric analysis of the behavioural impacts of pesticide exposure on zebrafish

Pesticides are indispensable in agriculture and have become ubiquitous in aquatic environments. Pesticides in natural environments can cause many negative impacts on aquatic species, ranging from mortality to sub-lethal physiological and behavioural changes. The complex sub-lethal impacts of pesticides are routinely tested on model species, with zebrafish (Danio rerio) being regularly used as a behavioural model. Although behavioural ecotoxicology research using zebrafish is increasing rapidly, we lack quantitative evidence to support which pesticides have been tested and how study designs are carried out. This shortcoming not only limits the deliberate planning for future primary studies to fill the knowledge gaps but also hinders evidence synthesis. To provide quantitative evidence of what pesticides are currently studied and what study designs are used, we combined a systematic evidence map approach and bibliometric analysis. This novel method has been coined research weaving and allows us to elicit gaps and clusters in our evidence base, whilst showing connections between authors and institutions. The methodology can be summarised in five primary steps: literature searching, screening, extraction, data analysis and bibliometric analysis. We identified four areas where research on the sub-lethal effects of pesticide exposure on zebrafish is lacking. First, some widely used pesticides, such as neonicotinoids, are understudied. Second, most studies do not report important elements of the study design, namely the sex and the life-stage of the zebrafish. Third, some behaviours, such as impacts of pesticide exposure on zebrafish cognition, are underexplored. And last, we revealed through the bibliometric analysis that most of the research is conducted in developed countries and there is limited cross country co-authorships. Upon identifying these gaps, we offer solutions for each limitation, emphasizing the importance of diverse global research output and cross-country co-authorships. Our systematic evidence map and bibliometric analysis provide valuable insights for helping to guide future research, which can be used to help support evidence-based policy decisions.

A balancing act: navigating the nuances of co-production in mental health research

BACKGROUND

In the context of mental health research, co-production involves people with lived expertise, those with professional or academic expertise, and people with both of these perspectives collaborating to design and actualize research initiatives. In the literature, two dominant perspectives on co-production emerge. The first is in support of co-production, pointing to the transformative value of co-production for those involved, the quality of services developed through this process, as well as to broader system-level impacts (e.g. influencing changes in health system decision making, care practices, government policies, etc.). The second stance expresses scepticism about the capacity of co-production to engender genuine collaboration given the deeply ingrained power imbalances in the systems in which we operate. While some scholars have explored the intersections of these two perspectives, this body of literature remains limited.

MAIN TEXT

This paper contributes to the literature base by exploring the nuances of co-production in health research. Using our mental health participatory action research project as a case example, we explore the nuances of co-production through four key values that we embraced: 1. Navigating power relations together 2. Multi-directional learning 3. Slow and steady wins the race 4. Connecting through vulnerability CONCLUSIONS: By sharing these values and associated principles and practices, we invite readers to consider the complexities of co-production and explore how our experiences may inform their practice of co-production. Despite the inherent complexity of co-production, we contend that pursuing authentic and equitable collaborations is integral to shaping a more just and inclusive future in mental health research and the mental health system at large.

Climate change and cancer: the Environmental Justice perspective

Despite advances in cancer control-prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship-racial disparities in cancer incidence and survival persist and, in some cases, are widening in the United States. Since 2020, there's been growing recognition of the role of structural racism, including structurally racist policies and practices, as the main factor contributing to historical and contemporary disparities. Structurally racist policies and practices have been present since the genesis of the United States and are also at the root of environmental injustices, which result in disproportionately high exposure to environmental hazards among communities targeted for marginalization, increased cancer risk, disruptions in access to care, and worsening health outcomes. In addition to widening cancer disparities, environmental injustices enable the development of polluting infrastructure, which contribute to detrimental health outcomes in the entire population, and to climate change, the most pressing public health challenge of our time. In this commentary, we describe the connections between climate change and cancer through an Environmental Justice perspective (defined as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all racialized groups, nationalities, or income, in all aspects, including development, implementation, and enforcement, of policies and practices that affect the environment and public health), highlighting how the expertise developed in communities targeted for marginalization is crucial for addressing health disparities, tackling climate change, and advancing cancer control efforts for the entire population.

Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power

Power analysis currently dominates sample size determination for experiments, particularly in grant and ethics applications. Yet, this focus could paradoxically result in suboptimal study design because publication biases towards studies with the largest effects can lead to the overestimation of effect sizes. In this Essay, we propose a paradigm shift towards better study designs that focus less on statistical power. We also advocate for (pre)registration and obligatory reporting of all results (regardless of statistical significance), better facilitation of team science and multi-institutional collaboration that incorporates heterogenization, and the use of prospective and living meta-analyses to generate generalizable results. Such changes could make science more effective and, potentially, more equitable, helping to cultivate better collaborations.

COVID-19 as a chronic stressor and the importance of individual identity: A data-driven look at academic productivity during the pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted personal and professional life. For academics, research, teaching, and service tasks were upended and we all had to navigate the altered landscape. However, some individuals faced a disproportionate burden, particularly academics with minoritized identities or those who were early career, were caregivers, or had intersecting identities. As comparative endocrinologists, we determine how aspects of individual and species-level variation influence response to, recovery from, and resilience in the face of stressors. Here, we flip that framework and apply an integrative biological lens to the impact of the COVID-19 chronic stressor on our endocrine community. We address how the pandemic altered impact factors of academia (e.g., scholarly products) and relatedly, how factors of impact (e.g., sex, gender, race, career stage, caregiver status, etc.) altered the way in which individuals could respond. We predict the pandemic will have long-term impacts on the population dynamics, composition, and landscape of our academic ecosystem. Impact factors of research, namely journal submissions, were altered by COVID-19, and women authors saw a big dip. We discuss this broadly and then report General and Comparative Endocrinology (GCE) manuscript submission and acceptance status by gender and geographic region from 2019 to 2023. We also summarize how the pandemic impacted individuals with different axes of identity, how academic institutions have responded, compile proposed solutions, and conclude with a discussion on what we can all do to (re)build the academy in an equitable way. At GCE, the first author positions had gender parity, but men outnumbered women at the corresponding author position. Region of manuscript origin mattered for submission and acceptance rates, and women authors from Asia and the Middle East were the most heavily impacted by the pandemic. The number of manuscripts submitted dropped after year 1 of the pandemic and has not yet recovered. Thus, COVID-19 was a chronic stressor for the GCE community.

Community Cohesion, Social Support, and Mental Health among Black Individuals in Chicago: A Cross-Sectional Examination of the Effects on COVID-19 Vaccination

The COVID-19 pandemic put a significant strain on communities, social resources, and personal relationships, disproportionately impacting Black and low-income communities in the United States. Community cohesion and social support are positively associated with numerous health outcomes and preventive health measures, yet were strained during the pandemic due to COVID mitigation measures. This study examined the relationships between social cohesion, social support, mental health, and COVID-19 vaccination to understand whether community cohesion and social support were associated with increased likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. Data are from a cross-sectional survey of 537 Black Chicagoans that was disseminated between September 2021 and March 2022. Structural equation modeling was used to test associations between community cohesion, social support, loneliness, anxiety, stress, and having received a COVID-19 vaccination. Results demonstrated that social support mediated associations between community cohesion and loneliness, anxiety, and stress, but was not associated with COVID-19 vaccination. These results demonstrate the importance of community cohesion and social support on mental health and suggest there are other potential pathways that may link community cohesion and vaccination.

Examining the Relationship between Anti-Black Racism, Community and Police Violence, and COVID-19 Vaccination

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic emerged against a backdrop of long-standing racial inequities that contributed to significant disparities in COVID-19 mortality, morbidity, and eventually, vaccination rates. COVID-19 also converged with two social crises: anti-Black racism and community and police violence. The goal of this study was to examine the associations between community violence, police violence, anti-Black racism, and COVID-19 vaccination. Survey data were collected from a sample of 538 Black residents of Chicago between September 2021 and March 2022. Structural equation modeling was used to test associations between neighborhood violence, police violence, racism, medical mistrust, trust in COVID-related information, depressive symptoms, and having received a COVID-19 vaccination. In line with predictions, neighborhood violence had a significant indirect effect on vaccination via trust in COVID-related information from a personal doctor. Additionally, racism had a significant indirect effect on vaccination via trust in COVID-related information from a personal doctor, as well as via medical mistrust and trust in COVID-related information from a personal doctor. These findings add to the growing body of literature demonstrating the importance of medical mistrust when examining COVID-19 vaccination disparities. Furthermore, this study highlights the importance of considering how social and structural factors such as violence and racism can influence medical mistrust.

Importance of timely metadata curation to the global surveillance of genetic diversity

Genetic diversity within species represents a fundamental yet underappreciated level of biodiversity. Because genetic diversity can indicate species resilience to changing climate, its measurement is relevant to many national and global conservation policy targets. Many studies produce large amounts of genome-scale genetic diversity data for wild populations, but most (87%) do not include the associated spatial and temporal metadata necessary for them to be reused in monitoring programs or for acknowledging the sovereignty of nations or Indigenous peoples. We undertook a distributed datathon to quantify the availability of these missing metadata and to test the hypothesis that their availability decays with time. We also worked to remediate missing metadata by extracting them from associated published papers, online repositories, and direct communication with authors. Starting with 848 candidate genomic data sets (reduced representation and whole genome) from the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration, we determined that 561 contained mostly samples from wild populations. We successfully restored spatiotemporal metadata for 78% of these 561 data sets (n = 440 data sets with data on 45,105 individuals from 762 species in 17 phyla). Examining papers and online repositories was much more fruitful than contacting 351 authors, who replied to our email requests 45% of the time. Overall, 23% of our email queries to authors unearthed useful metadata. The probability of retrieving spatiotemporal metadata declined significantly as age of the data set increased. There was a 13.5% yearly decrease in metadata associated with published papers or online repositories and up to a 22% yearly decrease in metadata that were only available from authors. This rapid decay in metadata availability, mirrored in studies of other types of biological data, should motivate swift updates to data-sharing policies and researcher practices to ensure that the valuable context provided by metadata is not lost to conservation science forever.

The COVID-19, racism, and violence syndemic: Evidence from a qualitative study with Black residents of Chicago

The COVID-19 pandemic emerged in the United States in the shadows of a vast history of structural racism and community and police violence that disproportionately affect Black communities. Collectively, they have created a syndemic, wherein COVID-19, racism, and violence are mutually reinforcing to produce adverse health outcomes. The purpose of this study was to understand the COVID-19, racism, and violence syndemic and examine how structural racism and violence contributed to the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on Black communities. In early 2021, we conducted phenomenological qualitative interviews with 50 Black residents of Chicago. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. We identified four primary themes in our analyses: 1) the intersection of racism and violence in Chicago; 2) longstanding inequities were laid bare by COVID-19; 3) the pervasiveness of racism and violence contributes to poor mental health; 4) and COVID-19, racism and violence emerged as a syndemic. Our findings underscore the importance of addressing social and structural factors in remediating the health and social consequences brought about by COVID-19.

Reimagining journal clubs for inclusive scientific training

'Canonical' journal clubs, which rely on a presenter guiding a group through the figures of a scientific article, do not fully realize their training potential. We provide a blueprint and resources for effectively leveraging journal clubs to meet specific training objectives and to further equity, diversity, inclusion, and belonging goals.

Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers

Fisheries are highly complex social-ecological systems that often face 'wicked' problems from unsustainable resource management to climate change. Addressing these challenges requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate perspectives across scientific disciplines and knowledge systems. Despite widespread calls for transdisciplinary fisheries research (TFR), there are still limitations in personal and institutional capacity to conduct and support this work to the highest potential. The viewpoints of early career researchers (ECRs) in this field can illuminate challenges and promote systemic change within fisheries research. This paper presents the perspectives of ECRs from across the globe, gathered through a virtual workshop held during the 2021 World Fisheries Congress, on goals, challenges, and future potential for TFR. Big picture goals for TFR were guided by principles of co-production and included (i) integrating transdisciplinary thinking at all stages of the research process, (ii) ensuring that research is inclusive and equitable, (iii) co-creating knowledge that is credible, relevant, actionable, and impactful, and (iv) consistently communicating with partners. Institutional inertia, lack of recognition of the extra time and labour required for TFR, and lack of skill development opportunities were identified as three key barriers in conducting TFR. Several critical actions were identified to help ECRs, established researchers, and institutions reach these goals. We encourage ECRs to form peer-mentorship networks to guide each other along the way. We suggest that established researchers ensure consistent mentorship while also giving space to ECR voices. Actions for institutions include retooling education programs, developing and implementing new metrics of impact, and critically examining individualism and privilege in academia. We suggest that the opportunities and actions identified here, if widely embraced now, can enable research that addresses complex challenges facing fishery systems contributing to a healthier future for fish and humans alike.

Academic Productivity of Equity-Deserving Physician Scholars During COVID-19: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic presented new barriers and exacerbated existing inequities for physician scholars. While COVID-19's impact on academic productivity among women has received attention, the pandemic may have posed additional challenges for scholars from a wider range of equity-deserving groups, including those who hold multiple equity-deserving identities. To examine this concern, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature through an intersectionality lens.

METHOD

The authors searched peer-reviewed literature published March 1, 2020, to December 16, 2021, in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed. The authors excluded studies not written in English and/or outside of academic medicine. From included studies, they extracted data regarding descriptions of how COVID-19 impacted academic productivity of equity-deserving physician scholars, analyses on the pandemic's reported impact on productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, and strategies provided to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academic productivity of physician scholars from equity-deserving groups.

RESULTS

Of 11,587 unique articles, 44 met inclusion criteria, including 15 nonempirical studies and 29 empirical studies (22 bibliometrics studies, 6 surveys, and 1 qualitative study). All included articles focused on the gendered impact of the pandemic on academic productivity. The majority of their recommendations focused on how to alleviate the burden of the pandemic on women, particularly those in the early stages of their career and/or with children, without consideration of scholars who hold multiple and intersecting identities from a wider range of equity-deserving groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate a lack of published literature on the pandemic's impact on physician scholars from equity-deserving groups, including a lack of consideration of physician scholars who experience multiple forms of discrimination. Well-intentioned measures by academic institutions to reduce the impact on scholars may inadvertently risk reproducing and sustaining inequities that equity-deserving scholars faced during the pandemic.

Building consensus around the assessment and interpretation of Symbiodiniaceae diversity

Within microeukaryotes, genetic variation and functional variation sometimes accumulate more quickly than morphological differences. To understand the evolutionary history and ecology of such lineages, it is key to examine diversity at multiple levels of organization. In the dinoflagellate family Symbiodiniaceae, which can form endosymbioses with cnidarians (e.g., corals, octocorals, sea anemones, jellyfish), other marine invertebrates (e.g., sponges, molluscs, flatworms), and protists (e.g., foraminifera), molecular data have been used extensively over the past three decades to describe phenotypes and to make evolutionary and ecological inferences. Despite advances in Symbiodiniaceae genomics, a lack of consensus among researchers with respect to interpreting genetic data has slowed progress in the field and acted as a barrier to reconciling observations. Here, we identify key challenges regarding the assessment and interpretation of Symbiodiniaceae genetic diversity across three levels: species, populations, and communities. We summarize areas of agreement and highlight techniques and approaches that are broadly accepted. In areas where debate remains, we identify unresolved issues and discuss technologies and approaches that can help to fill knowledge gaps related to genetic and phenotypic diversity. We also discuss ways to stimulate progress, in particular by fostering a more inclusive and collaborative research community. We hope that this perspective will inspire and accelerate coral reef science by serving as a resource to those designing experiments, publishing research, and applying for funding related to Symbiodiniaceae and their symbiotic partnerships.

Ten simple rules for failing successfully in academia

Failure is an integral part of life and by extension academia. At the same time, failure is often ignored, with potentially negative consequences both for the science and the scientists involved. This article provides several strategies for learning from and dealing with failure instead of ignoring it. Hopefully, our recommendations are widely applicable, while still taking into account individual differences between academics. These simple rules allow academics to further develop their own strategies for failing successfully in academia.

Women’s thirty-year contribution to cheetah conservation: An insight into volunteer-based conservation program supported by female scientists

Women make up a small percentage of the scientific community, including conservation. Today, conservation efforts are vital for the survival of many species, however there is a gender bias within the conservation field. Encouraging more women into conservation could be a key to increasing efficiency and success in conservation goals of organizations and governments. Here we investigate the long running Earthwatch, working guest and intern volunteer programs of the Cheetah Conservation Fund (CCF) to understand women’s involvement with volunteer based conservation, and questionnaire data to understand women’s contribution to conservation after volunteering and what challenges women face in conservation. Our results showed there was significantly more female volunteers than male volunteers (p-value <0.000) and on average, females contributed to 73.7% of the volunteer population annually. Volunteer’s age at time of volunteering varied between the three volunteer programs. Women’s motivations for volunteering and challenges that women face in conservation was dependent on the volunteers’ age. CCF’s holistic approach to conservation, volunteers’ love for cheetahs and ability to gain practical skills were the leading motivations why women volunteered with CCF. Many (87%) of the female interns said volunteering was a means of helping them gain employment. Women’s credibility, family responsibility and personal safety were the main challenges that women face working in conservation today. Addressing gender disparities in every stage of career progression will lead to overall improved conservation outcomes.

Picture a data scientist: a call to action for increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the age of AI

The lack of diversity, equity, and inclusion continues to hamper the artificial intelligence (AI) field and is especially problematic for healthcare applications. In this article, we expand on the need for diversity, equity, and inclusion, specifically focusing on the composition of AI teams. We call to action leaders at all levels to make team inclusivity and diversity the centerpieces of AI development, not the afterthought. These recommendations take into consideration mitigation at several levels, including outreach programs at the local level, diversity statements at the academic level, and regulatory steps at the federal level.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown in a biomedical research campus: A gender perspective analysis

From March to September 2020, researchers working at a biomedical scientific campus in Spain faced two lockdowns and various mobility restrictions that affected their social and professional lifestyles. The working group "Women in Science," which acts as an independent observatory of scientific gender inequalities on campus launched an online survey to assess the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on scientific activity, domestic and caregiving tasks, and psychological status. The survey revealed differences in scientific performance by gender: while male researchers participated in a larger number of scientific activities for career development, female researchers performed more invisible scientific tasks, including peer review or outreach activities. Mental impact was greater in researchers caring for children or dependents, and this was aggravated for women. Results spot a disproportionate impact of COVID-19 lockdowns on female scientific career development, and urges for equity measures to mitigate the consequences of an increase in the gender gap in biomedical sciences for current and future pandemics.

Five actionable pillars to engage the next generation of leaders in the co-design of transformative ocean solutions

Solutions to complex and unprecedented global challenges are urgently needed. Overcoming these challenges requires input and innovative solutions from all experts, including Early Career Ocean Professionals (ECOPs). To achieve diverse inclusion from ECOPs, fundamental changes must occur at all levels—from individuals to organizations. Drawing on insights from across the globe, we propose 5 actionable pillars that support the engagement of ECOPs in co-design processes that address ocean sustainability: sharing knowledge through networks and mentorship, providing cross-boundary training and opportunities, incentivizing and celebrating knowledge co-design, creating inclusive and participatory governance structures, and catalyzing culture change for inclusivity. Foundational to all actions are the cross-cutting principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusivity. In addition, the pillars are cross-boundary in nature, including collaboration and innovation across sectors, disciplines, regions, generations, and backgrounds. Together, these recommendations provide an actionable and iterative path toward inclusive engagement and intergenerational exchange that can develop ocean solutions for a sustainable future.

Early Career Ocean Professionals (ECOPs) need to engage in co-design processes that address ocean sustainability. This Consensus View proposes five pillars to provide an actionable and iterative path toward inclusive engagement and intergenerational exchange that can develop ocean solutions for a sustainable future.

Brazilian female researchers do not publish less despite an academic structure that deepens sex gap

In the 21st century, we still need to talk about gender inequality in science. Even with the sharp growth of studies on this theme over the last decades, we are still trying to convince our peers that diversity matters and, if embraced, makes better science. Part of this drawback can be related to the need for data to support effective proposals to change the academic scenario. In order to close some of those gaps, we here analyze 1) the profile of Brazilian researchers based on production, impact, and membership to the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, 2) participation in the Editorial boards of Brazilian journals dedicated to Entomology, and, 3) the academic scenario of Brazilian Entomology focusing on the sex of the first and last authors in peer-reviewed international publications related to Entomology. We aimed to provide a deeper look on the Brazilian Entomology scenario and to expand the amount of data availability to stimulate and foster a mind-change in the current academic structure. We performed scientometric searches and analysis using different platforms and found that the number and impact of the publications by female researchers, as observed by relative numbers, are not less than that of males. Despite that, female researchers are less represented at the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and editorial boards, reinforcing the lack of women recognition in science. Thus, we observe that some narratives related to the productivity gap can be misleading to a perpetuation of our internal and structural biases. We here expanded data from a previous paper where we scrutinized the Brazilian Entomology scenario and discussed the patches and systems that maintain gender gap in science.

Quantifying the internationalization and representativeness in research

Author-level performance metrics do not account for collaboration and knowledge transfer between people, institutions, and countries. We propose the i-index and r-index, publication metrics that aim to incentivize the collaboration between researchers and research institutions across borders. These indices promote benefit-sharing among countries of different levels of development.

Changing the Academic Gender Narrative through Open Access

In this article, we ask whether dominant narratives of gender and performance within academic institutions are masking stories that may be both more complex and potentially more hopeful than those which are often told using publication-related data. Influenced by world university rankings, institutions emphasise so-called ‘excellent’ research practices: publish in ‘high impact’, elite subscription journals indexed by the commercial bibliographic databases that inform the various ranking systems. In particular, we ask whether data relating to institutional demographics and open access publications could support a different story about the roles that women are playing as pioneers and practitioners of open scholarship. We review gender bias in scholarly publications and discuss examples of open access research publications that highlight a positive advantage for women. Using analysis of workforce demographics and open research data from our Open Knowledge Initiative project, we explore relationships and correlations between academic gender and open access research output from universities in Australia and the United Kingdom. This opens a conversation about different possibilities and models for exploring research output by gender and changing the dominant narrative of deficit in academic publishing.

Long-Term Retention of Diverse Paleontologists Requires Increasing Accessibility

Geoscience encompasses a variety of scientific subdisciplines aimed at exploring, understanding, and predicting global phenomena. Yet despite its global reach, the geosciences are the least diverse of the STEM disciplines. Paleontology, a subdiscipline which prides itself on unearthing the diversity of life, comprises no greater level of diversity among its researchers than geosciences overall. This deficiency is in direct opposition to the level of public interest generated by paleontological research. Paleontology has broad educational appeal and has been leveraged in various ways to promote STEM learning. However, despite this widespread interest, there is an overwhelming decrease in the diversity of participants in paleontology at increasing levels of academia. At each academic career stage, from undergraduate to tenured faculty, the number of underrepresented (URP) and underserved persons (USP) dwindles. Here we highlight and discuss barriers to access experienced by URP and USP researchers that hinder their ability to progress at every level of the academic journey post-K-12, focusing on the track to a tenured professorship. Neglecting to consider the unique barriers faced by URPs and USPs when developing curricula, building programs, and evaluating productivity perpetuates the chronic lack of diversity in paleontology, regardless of individual interest in pursuing a career in the field. We also suggest actionable items for instructors, as well as members of the scientific community in positions of power and policymakers. While the lack of diversity in paleontology is dire, the field is small enough that individuals have the potential to make a meaningful difference.

Promoting Cancer Health Equity: A Qualitative Study of Mentee and Mentor Perspectives of a Training Program for Underrepresented Scholars in Cancer Health Disparities

Racial and ethnic minorities, and women, experience stark disparities in cancer risk behaviors and mortality rates, yet often remain underrepresented in scientific research positions. We conducted an exploratory, qualitative study to examine the value of mentored research experience as part of an NCI-funded research training program designed to increase the representation of minority and women scientists in cancer disparities research. Using individual interviews, we explored 16 mentees’ and 7 mentors’ program experiences and perspectives to identify the most effective strategies to build strong mentoring relationships that could ultimately contribute to increased representation in health disparities research. Two expert analysts employed thematic analysis and constant comparison to code, categorize, and summarize the data into themes. Mentees and mentors shared five themes identifying contributions to program success: conditions for building successful mentoring relationships; role of mentor/mentee similarities or differences and their impact on effective collaboration; program elements that fostered developing knowledge, skills, and confidence; program supportive opportunities; and challenges and benefits of in-person vs. virtual program delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings contribute to improving the quality of training programs for historically excluded trainees to advance their cancer disparities research careers and offer a successful model that can guide similar programs.

Measuring the influence of non-scientific features on citations

Citations remain a prime, yet controversial, measure of academic performance. Ideally, how often a paper is cited should solely depend on the quality of the science reported therein. However, non-scientific factors, including structural elements (e.g., length of abstract, number of references) or attributes of authors (e.g., prestige and gender), may all influence citation outcomes. Knowing the predicted effect of these features on citations might make it possible to ‘game the system’ of citation counts when writing a paper. We conducted a meta-analysis to build a quantitative understanding of the effect of similar non-scientific features on the impact of scientific articles in terms of citations. We showed that article length, number of authors, author experience and their collaboration network, Impact Factors, availability as open access, online sharing, different referencing practice, and number of figures all exerted a positive influence on citations. These patterns were consistent across most disciplines. We also documented temporal trends towards a recent increase in the effect of journal Impact Factor and number of authors on citations. We suggest that our approach can be used as a benchmark to monitor the influence of these effects over time, minimising the influence of non-scientific features as a means to game the system of citation counts, and thus enhancing their usefulness as a measure of scientific quality.

Assessing researchers' capabilities, opportunities, and motivation to conduct equity-oriented dissemination and implementation research, an exploratory cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

A recent paradigm shift has led to an explicit focus on enhancing health equity through equity-oriented dissemination and implementation (D&I) research. However, the integration and bidirectional learning across these two fields is still in its infancy and siloed. This exploratory study aimed to examine participants' perceived capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to conduct equity-oriented D&I research.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory cross-sectional survey distributed online from December 2020 to April 2021. Participants were recruited at either D&I or health disparities-oriented conferences, meetings, through social media, or personal outreach via emails. Informed by the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model (COM-B), the survey queried respondents about different aspects of engaging in and conducting equity-oriented D&I research. All analyses were conducted in SPSS Version 27.0.

RESULTS

A total of 180 participants responded to the survey. Most participants were women (81.7%), white (66.1%), academics (78.9%), and faculty members (53.9%). Many reported they were advanced (36.7%) or advanced beginners (27.8%) in the D&I field, and a substantial proportion (37.8%) reported being novice in D&I research that focused on health equity. Participants reported high motivation (e.g., 62.8% were motivated to apply theories, models, frameworks for promoting health equity in D&I research), but low capability to conduct equity-oriented D&I research (e.g., 5% had the information needed for promoting health equity in D&I research). Most participants (62.2%) reported not having used measures to examine equity in their D&I projects, and for those who did use measures, they mainly used individual-level measures (vs. organizational- or structural-level measures). When asked about factors that could influence their ability to conduct equity-oriented D&I research, 44.4% reported not having the skills necessary, and 32.2% stated difficulties in receiving funding for equity-oriented D&I research.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings provide empirical insight into the perspectives of researchers from different backgrounds on what is needed to conduct equity-oriented D&I research. These data suggest the need for a multi-pronged approach to enhance the capability and opportunities for conducting equity-oriented D&I work, such as: training specifically in equity-oriented D&I, collaboration between D&I researchers with individuals with expertise and lived experience with health equity research, funding for equity-oriented D&I research, and recognition of the value of community engaged research in promotion packages.

The Role of Behavioral Medicine in Addressing Climate Change-Related Health Inequities

Climate change is the greatest threat to global health in human history. It has been declared a public health emergency by the World Health Organization and leading researchers from academic institutions around the globe. Structural racism disproportionately exposes communities targeted for marginalization to the harmful consequences of climate change through greater risk of exposure and sensitivity to climate hazards and less adaptive capacity to the health threats of climate change. Given its interdisciplinary approach to integrating behavioral, psychosocial, and biomedical knowledge, the discipline of behavioral medicine is uniquely qualified to address the systemic causes of climate change-related health inequities and can offer a perspective that is currently missing from many climate and health equity efforts. In this article, we summarize relevant concepts, describe how climate change and structural racism intersect to exacerbate health inequities, and recommend six strategies with the greatest potential for addressing climate-related health inequities.

Kinesiology, Physical Activity, Physical Education, and Sports through an Equity/Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Lens: A Scoping Review

Background: Equity, equality, diversity, and inclusion are terms covered in the academic literature focusing on sports, kinesiology, physical education, and physical activity, including in conjunction with marginalized groups. Universities in many countries use various EDI policy frameworks and work under the EDI headers “equality, diversity and inclusion”, “equity, diversity and inclusion”, “diversity, equity and inclusion”, and similar phrases (all referred to as EDI) to rectify problems students, non-academic staff, and academic staff from marginalized groups, such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, and Two-Spirit (LGBTQ2S+) experience. Which EDI data, if any, are generated influences EDI efforts in universities (research, education, and general workplace climate) of all programs. Method: Our study used a scoping review approach and employed SCOPUS and the 70 databases of EBSCO-Host, which includes SportDiscus, as sources aimed to analyze the extent (and how) the academic literature focusing on sports, kinesiology, physical education, and physical activity engages with EDI. Results: We found only 18 relevant sources and a low to no coverage of marginalized groups linked to EDI, namely racialized minorities (12), women (6), LGBTQ2S+ (5), disabled people (2), and Indigenous peoples (0). Conclusions: Our findings suggest a gap in the academic inquiry and huge opportunities.

Auditing the ‘Social’ of Quantum Technologies: A Scoping Review

Various phrases such as “social implications”, social impact” and “ethical, legal and social implications” are used to indicate the impact of a given scientific or technological advancements on the ‘social’. The impact on the ‘social’ is one focus of science and technology governance discussions. Many terms and phrases can be used to audit the engagement of a given technology (such as quantum technologies) with the ‘social’. Marginalized groups are particularly impacted by the ‘social’. Equity, Diversity, and, Inclusion (EDI) and similar phrases are part of discussing the ‘social’. EDI frameworks and phrases are employed as policy concepts to decrease the research, education, and general workplace problems members of marginalized groups such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ encounter at universities and other workplaces. How quantum technologies-focused discussions engage with the ‘social’ can impact EDI activities, and quantum technologies-focused discussions can be impacted in turn by EDI activities. The objective of this study was to map the engagement with the ‘social’ in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature. A scoping review coupled with a manifest coding approach was used to answer three research questions: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures that can be seen to cover aspects of the ‘social’ are present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (2) To what extent are EDI frameworks and phrases present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (3) Which marginalized groups visible in EDI discourses are covered in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? Using the academic databases SCOPUS, EBSCO-HOST, Web of Science, Compendex, Inspec Archive, and Knovel, 362,728 English language abstracts were obtained for the manifest coding using 62 Quantum-related technical phrases and 1062 English language abstracts were obtained using 17 non-technical Quantum-related phrases. Within the 362,728 abstracts of the 200 terms and phrases (which did not have to contain the term “social”) used to answer the research questions, 87 were not mentioned in any abstracts, 47 were mentioned in less than 10, 30 were mentioned in between 10 and 100, and 29 were mentioned in over 100 abstracts. Within the 1062 abstracts, 164 terms and phrases were not mentioned at all, 19 were mentioned in over 10, 8 were mentioned in between 10 and 100 (all false positive), and one was mentioned in over 100 abstracts (false positive). The term “social” or phrases containing “social” appeared in only 867 of the 362,728 abstracts and only 10 of the 1062 abstracts. EDI frameworks and phrases were not present in the 362,728 abstracts and 1062 abstracts, and many marginalized groups engaged with in EDI discussions were not present in the 362,728 and 1062 abstracts either. The results reveal vast opportunities to engage with the ‘social’ of quantum technologies in many different ways, including through EDI frameworks and concepts and by engaging with marginalized groups covered under EDI.

Biogeosciences Perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) Science

This article is composed of three independent commentaries about the state of Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) principles in the American Geophysical Union Biogeosciences section, and discussion on the opportunities and challenges of adopting them. Each commentary focuses on a different topic: (a) Global collaboration, technology transfer, and application (Section 2), (b) Community engagement, community science, education, and stakeholder involvement (Section 3), and (c) Field, experimental, remote sensing, and real-time data research and application (Section 4). We discuss needs and strategies for implementing ICON and outline short- and long-term goals. The inclusion of global data and international community engagement are key to tackling grand challenges in biogeosciences. Although recent technological advances and growing open-access information across the world have enabled global collaborations to some extent, several barriers, ranging from technical to organizational to cultural, have remained in advancing interoperability and tangible scientific progress in biogeosciences. Overcoming these hurdles is necessary to address pressing large-scale research questions and applications in the biogeosciences, where ICON principles are essential. Here, we list several opportunities for ICON, including coordinated experimentation and field observations across global sites, that are ripe for implementation in biogeosciences as a means to scientific advancements and social progress.

eLife's new model and its impact on science communication

The eLife Early-Career Advisory Group discusses eLife's new peer review and publishing model, and how the whole process of scientific communication could be improved for the benefit of early-career researchers and the entire scientific community.

Turning the Tide for Academic Women in STEM: A Postpandemic Vision for Supporting Female Scientists

The "leaky pipeline" of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), which is especially acute for academic mothers, continues to be problematic as women face continuous cycles of barriers and obstacles to advancing further in their fields. The severity and prevalence of the COVID-19 pandemic both highlighted and exacerbated the unique challenges faced by female graduate students, postdocs, research staff, and principal investigators because of lockdowns, quarantines, school closures, lack of external childcare, and heightened family responsibilities, on top of professional responsibilities. This perspective provides recommendations of specific policies and practices that combat stigmas faced by women in STEM and can help them retain their careers. We discuss actions that can be taken to support women within academic institutions, journals, government/federal centers, university-level departments, and individual research groups. These recommendations are based on prior initiatives that have been successful in having a positive impact on gender equity─a central tenet of our postpandemic vision for the STEM workforce.

Three-Decades of Research Integration—Transforming to Collaborative Aquatic Food Systems Research Partnerships in the Pacific

High-quality research to provide sustainable development solutions in aquatic food systems requires a deliberate theory for its application at scale. One frequently defined pathway in theories of change for scaling research innovation is through partnerships. Yet, despite the widespread application of partnership modalities in food-systems research, only a small proportion of published research provides original and high-quality solutions for small-scale producers. Metrics of academic success can incentivize publication regardless of end-user impact. Analogously, partnerships among national and international institutions can also lack impact because of inequity and persistent power imbalances. We describe a long-term research for development partnership between a CGIAR center (WorldFish) and a national government agency (Solomon Islands Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources; MFMR). We review the literature produced by, or about, the activities carried out in the name of the partnership over a 35-year period to build a time-line and to identify elements of research power, priorities and capacity by decade. The form and function of the collaboration through time form the basis of our analysis of the journey toward an increasingly equitable partnership: a theorized goal toward greater development outcome at scale in Solomon Islands. The partnership has been strongly influenced by changes in both institutions. The MFMR has undergone a significant increase in operational capacity since the partnership was first conceived in 1986. WorldFish has also undergone change and has navigated tensions between being locally impactful and globally relevant through periods of different research foci. With an increasingly competent and capable ministry, dimensions of power and practice have had to be re-visited to embed CGIAR research on aquatic food systems within national development trajectories. By focusing on a practice seeking more meaningful and respectful partnerships, WorldFish—as an international research partner—continues to evolve to be fit for purpose as a credible and effective research partner. We discuss this journey in the context of system-level change for aquatic food system sustainability and innovation.

The Gender Gap in Brazilian Entomology: an Analysis of the Academic Scenario

Although women are about half of world's population, they are underrepresented in many sectors including academia and the research scenario in general. Gender gap in Entomology has been pointed out in other publications; however, data for Brazil has never been demonstrated. Here we provide a diagnosis for the Brazilian Entomology scenario in order to contribute to propositions towards disentangling the gender gap in general. We analyzed scientometric data for Brazilian Entomology focusing on gender disparity and on personal perceptions related to the gender gap through an online questionnaire. We detected a pervasive gender bias in which the scissor-shaped curve is the most representative effect of it: women were the majority in lower degree stages but the minority in higher degree stages (permanent positions and positions of prestige and power). We also observed mentorship bias and discussed these results in light of intersectionality and the COVID-19 pandemic. Gender differences were perceived differently by the questionnaire respondents considering age, gender, and parenting. With this data and analyses, we have provided elements to stimulate and support change to a healthier and more equitable academic space.

The data-index: An author-level metric that values impactful data and incentivizes data sharing

Author-level metrics are a widely used measure of scientific success. The h-index and its variants measure publication output (number of publications) and research impact (number of citations). They are often used to influence decisions, such as allocating funding or jobs. Here, we argue that the emphasis on publication output and impact hinders scientific progress in the fields of ecology and evolution because it disincentivizes two fundamental practices: generating impactful (and therefore often long-term) datasets and sharing data. We describe a new author-level metric, the data-index, which values both dataset output (number of datasets) and impact (number of data-index citations), so promotes generating and sharing data as a result. We discuss how it could be implemented and provide user guidelines. The data-index is designed to complement other metrics of scientific success, as scientific contributions are diverse and our value system should reflect that both for the benefit of scientific progress and to create a value system that is more equitable, diverse, and inclusive. Future work should focus on promoting other scientific contributions, such as communicating science, informing policy, mentoring other scientists, and providing open-access code and tools.

Ten strategies for avoiding and overcoming authorship conflicts in academic publishing

For better or for worse, authorship is a currency in scholarly research and advancement. In scholarly writing, authorship is widely acknowledged as a means of conferring credit but is also tied to concepts such as responsibility and accountability. Authorship is one of the most divisive topics both at the level of the research team and more broadly in the academy and beyond. At present, authorship is often the primary way to assert and receive credit in many scholarly pursuits and domains. Debates rage, publicly but mostly privately, regarding authorship. Here we attempt to clarify key concepts related to authorship informed by our collective experiences and anchored in relevant contemporary literature. Rather than dwelling on the problems, we focus on proactive strategies for creating more just, equitable, and transparent avenues for minimizing conflict around authorship and where there is adequate recognition of the entire process of knowledge generation, synthesis, sharing, and application with partners within and beyond the academy. We frame our ideas around 10 strategies that collectively constitute a roadmap for avoiding and overcoming challenges associated with authorship decisions.