Am J Epidemiol. 2020 Oct 1;189(10):1042-1046. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa111.
Increasing diversity and inclusion among organizational membership has become a focus for many professional societies, including the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER). In this issue of the Journal, DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020:189(10):998-1010) assessed dimensions of diversity and inclusion within SER to provide baseline data for future evaluations of Society initiatives. In our response, we note that diversity in SER appears strong but there is lag with regard to inclusion. We also highlight some of the major weaknesses of this study that hinder efforts to accurately evaluate inclusion within SER. There is a need to more concretely define inclusion and think broadly about how measures of inclusion should be operationalized in future surveys. Additional limitations of the study include its limited generalizability to the wider SER membership and the lack of questions about barriers to inclusion in SER activities. We conclude with recommendations for SER and other professional societies based on prior literature evaluating successful diversity and inclusion efforts. We also propose a conceptual model to assist with operationalizing and directing future analyses of inclusion measures. It is essential that SER move beyond efforts around diversity to focus on measuring and enhancing inclusion.
提高组织成员的多样性和包容性已经成为许多专业协会的关注焦点，包括流行病学研究学会（SER）。在本期杂志中，DeVilbiss 等人（Am J Epidemiol. 2020:189(10):998-1010）评估了 SER 内部多样性和包容性的各个方面，为未来评估学会的举措提供了基线数据。在我们的回应中，我们注意到 SER 中的多样性似乎很强，但在包容性方面存在滞后。我们还强调了这项研究的一些主要弱点，这些弱点阻碍了准确评估 SER 内部包容性的努力。需要更具体地定义包容性，并广泛思考如何在未来的调查中实施包容性措施。该研究还存在一些局限性，包括其对更广泛的 SER 成员的适用性有限，以及缺乏关于 SER 活动中包容性障碍的问题。我们根据评估成功多样性和包容性努力的先前文献，为 SER 和其他专业协会提出了建议。我们还提出了一个概念模型，以协助实施和指导未来的包容性措施分析。SER 必须超越多样性方面的努力，专注于衡量和增强包容性。
