Variations in surgical peer-reviewed publications among editorial board members, associate editors and their respective journal: Towards maintaining academic integrity

Abstract

BackgroundPhysician scientists who are also Editorial Board members or Associate Editors may prefer publishing in their own journal and therefore create an environment for conflicts of interest to arise. ObjectivesTo assess the relationship between the number of peer-reviewed publications in surgical journals in which authors serve as Editorial Board Members and Associate Editors and their total number of annual publications. Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study utilizing PubMed was performed regarding the total annual number of peer-reviewed publications by Editorial Board Members/Associate Editors and the number published in their respective affiliated journals from 2016 to 2019. Significance defined as p < 0.05. Results80 Associate Editors and 721 Editorial Board Members (n = 801 total) were analyzed from 10 surgical journals. The mean number of total annual peer-reviewed publications varied from 5.19 to 17.18. The mean number of annual peer-reviewed publications in affiliated journals varied from 0.06 to 2.53. Multiple significant associations were discovered between the total number of annual peer-reviewed publications and number of peer-reviewed publications in affiliated journals for all authors/surgical journals evaluated, except for the International Journal of Surgery (p > 0.05). ConclusionsWe found significant associations between the total number of annual peer-reviewed publications by Editorial Board Members/Associate Editors and number of annual peer-reviewed publications by their affiliated surgical journals. The implementation and enforcement of a standardized double-blind review process and mandatory reporting of any potential conflicts of interest can reduce possible bias and promote a fair and high-quality peer-review process.