Research Voices from the Field showcases cutting-edge research that breaks barriers and promotes inclusion in medicine. Each edition spotlights a research publication and includes insights directly from the authors—revealing their motivations, the significance of their findings, and why the research matters for healthcare professionals everywhere.
In this edition, Kevin Eva, Associate Director and Scientist in the Centre for Health Education Scholarship, and Professor and Director of Educational Research and Scholarship in the Department of Medicine, reflects on why he co-authored “Considerations of equity, diversity and inclusion in peer reviews conducted for Medical Education.”
Kevin Eva, Associate Director and Scientist in the Centre for Health Education Scholarship, and Professor and Director of Educational Research and Scholarship in the Department of Medicine, reflects on why he co-authored “Considerations of equity, diversity and inclusion in peer reviews conducted for Medical Education.“
As Editor-in-Chief of Medical Education, I’ve been collaborating with many people to try to reduce barriers for underprivileged groups in the realm of academic publishing. Having to review and adjudicate scholarly submissions is an exclusionary process by definition – our journal’s acceptance rate is <10% – but we strive to take authors’ context into account in a variety of ways. That includes consideration of whether there is novelty, value, or insight to be drawn from submitted work as a result of it having been conducted in an underrepresented region. It also includes consideration of whether authors, regardless of where they are located, give due consideration to equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) issues in the work they conduct.
In the spirit of “testing drives behaviour,” we decided to emphasize the importance of deliberately contemplating EDI by explicitly asking peer reviewers of each submitted manuscript about the extent to which authors effectively engaged with EDI-related issues in a manner appropriate for the focus of their paper. This commentary was written about six months after implementation, based on an attempt to assess what reviewers thought was being done well and where authors commonly had blind spots in relation to how human difference could be incorporated into education scholarship.
Considerations of equity, diversity and inclusion in peer reviews conducted for Medical Education
Authors: Karen E Hauer, Rola Ajjawi, Lulu Alwazzan, Kevin Eva
Abstract
What equity, diversity and inclusion issues are commented upon by Med Educ’s reviewers? This commentary offers an analysis and recommendations for authors, reviewers and editors alike.
Have you’ve published or come across valuable research on the praxis of REDI in medicine? Share it today.
We especially welcome submissions of research articles that explore equity, diversity, inclusion, justice, decolonization, Indigenization, or trauma-informed practices in medicine and healthcare.