Abstract
The editorial independence of biomedical journals allows flexibility to meet a wide range of research interests. However, it also is a barrier for coordination between journals to solve challenging issues such as racial bias in the scientific literature. A standardized tool to screen for racial bias could prevent the publication of racially biased papers. Biomedical journals would maintain editorial autonomy while still allowing comparable data to be collected and analyzed across journals. A racially diverse research team carried out a three-phase study to generate and test a racial bias assessment tool for biomedical research. Phase 1, an in-depth, structured literature search to identify recommendations, found near complete agreement in the literature on addressing race in biomedical research. Phase 2, construction of a framework from those recommendations, provides the major innovation of this paper. The framework includes three dimensions of race: 1) context, 2) tone and terminology, and 3) analysis, which are the basis for the Race Equity Vetting Instrument for Editorial Workflow (REVIEW) tool. Phase 3, pilot testing the assessment tool, showed that the REVIEW tool was effective at flagging multiple concerns in widely criticized articles. This study demonstrates the feasibility of the proposed REVIEW tool to reduce racial bias in research. Next steps include testing this tool on a broader sample of biomedical research to determine how the tool performs on more subtle examples of racial bias.
Highlights
We discovered that tone was not included in the recommendations identified in the literature review
For the third article with a balanced approach to race cleared the pilot testing with no red flags. These results show that the Race Equity Vetting Instrument for Editorial Workflow (REVIEW) tool could have assisted editors to identifying manuscripts with troubling racial bias concerns in the pre-production editorial process
We searched the literature for recommendations, created a framework to capture the relevant dimensions of race, and demonstrated successful pilot testing of the REVIEW assessment tool for biomedical research publications
Summary
This provides room for a wide spectrum of research interests. The resulting disseminated nature of biomedical literature creates an obstacle to addressing difficult, systemic issues such as racial bias. A series of recent incidents, involving high impact factor journals, have drawn attention to the extent of those in research who lack a fundamental understanding of systemic racism [1]. Some of the recent editorials on addressing structural racism in medicine and biomedical publishing have been highly informative [2–4]. Many organizations, including scientific and medical professional societies and biomedical journals have made statements condemning health inequities. Khazanchi et al [5] call on organized medicine to go beyond declaratory advocacy towards action.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
