Impact of institutional affiliation bias on editorial publication decisions: A bibliometric analysis of three ophthalmology journals

Abstract

Blinding is rarely performed for journal editors, who may be influenced by author institutional affiliations when deciding which manuscripts should be advanced for peer review. This study aims to evaluate the proportion of original investigations recently published in three high impact factor ophthalmology journals for which authors had matching institutional affiliations with the journals’ editor-in-chief or editorial board members. This bibliometric analysis included original investigations published in Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, and American Journal of Ophthalmology between 2016 and 2020. The primary outcome was the proportion of studies for which the institutional affiliations of authors matched those of the editor-in-chief or other editorial board members. Descriptive analysis was also performed to assess the central tendency of affiliation match data. The study included 1033 studies from Ophthalmology; 822 from JAMA Ophthalmology; and 1513 from American Journal of Ophthalmology. In total, 48.9% of all included publications had at least one author-editor affiliation match and originated from 66 unique institutions. Stratified by journal, 55.0% of studies originated from 23 institutions across 32 editors for Ophthalmology; 41.8% originated from 22 institutions across 27 editors for JAMA Ophthalmology; and 48.5% originated from 45 institutions across 69 editors for American Journal of Ophthalmology. Study limitations were due to limited publicly available data. We were unable to identify trends of institutional affiliations among rejected articles or identify acceptance trends in articles based on which editor they were assigned. Additionally, we would have liked to report on affiliation matches between authors and reviewers. The finding that nearly half of all publications originated from a small pool of editor-affiliated institutions highlights the potential for editorial affiliation bias to exacerbate broader inequalities in academia. Editors should be blinded to ensure objective manuscript review.