Editor, British Journal of Psychiatry, London SW1X 8PG, UK. E-mail: bjp{at}rcpsych.ac.uk
P. T. is Editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry but was masked to the peer review process of this article.
Most readers of this journal will know something about global inequalities but may not fully realise their extent. The useful reminder is the nine to one rule: 90% of health resources are consumed by 10% of the richest countries (Global Forum for Health Research, 2000). This ratio is beginning to improve a little (the aim is to reach an 80/20 ratio in 10 years), although within-country inequalities may be increasing (Goesling, 2001). The same inequality applies to even the humble editorial offices of medical journals; our publication rates mirror closely the nine to one rule, with most of our articles coming from richer countries (Patel & Sumathipala, 2001). Readers of the Journal will note that the World Health Organization discussed this matter last year (Tyrer, 2004) and a consensus statement has now been issued jointly by that organisation and the editors of scientific journals (World Health Organization & Joint Editors, 2004). The aim of this consensus statement is an attempt to reverse the publication bias that currently favours authors from wealthy countries. Whether it succeeds is for history to note, but whatever the outcome it is worth the attempt.
INSTITUTIONAL RACISM
A term that was never mentioned 10 years ago is relevant to this discussion: institutional racism. It describes any system (usually a combination of institutions and people) that systematically discriminates against others on the grounds of race or creed, and can occur when the policies and practices of an organisation result in different outcomes for people from different racial groups. The editor of the Lancet, Richard Horton, recently claimed that most journals were institutionally racist (Horton, 2003). Many I have spoken to about this allegation dismiss it out of hand; What do you expect from the Lancet? Its just being aggravating as usual and living up to its name is the consensus of these views. However, when we consider what Richard Horton actually wrote, it is difficult to demur. The definition of institutional racism adopted by the Commission for Racial Equality in the UK states that unfair treatment often takes place without intention or knowledge, so when Horton argues for the widespread existence of editorial institutional racism he does not mean that editors themselves are consciously racist, but that our routine practice promotes it.
The scientific, medical, and public health priorities of the rich world are presented as the norm. We editors seek a global status for our journals, but we shut out the experiences and practices of those living in poverty by our (unconscious) neglect. One group is advantaged, while the other is marginalised. Since journals collectively embody the attitudes and behaviours of researchers and practitioners, the actions of editors reflect the state of medical research itself (Horton, 2003).
Thus we perpetuate the nine to one rule by publishing a tiny fraction of papers originating from countries of low and middle income, by having very few representatives of these countries on our editorial boards (Saxena et al, 2003) and by turning down a greater proportion of papers from these countries than we do from others. The British Journal of Psychiatry comes within the middle range when compared with other leading journals in this respect (Patel & Sumathipala, 2001); Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica comes out the best (Patel & Sumathipala, 2001; Parker & Parker, 2002) and the major American journals are the least generous in this respect. Only a small number of journals, including our own, promote a minor form of positive discrimination, asking referees to be more generous in assessing articles from the 90%.
ASSESSING PAPERS FROM LOWER-INCOME COUNTRIES
One form of racism in our editorial practice - and it is important to recognise that there are many others - could be found in our attitudes to articles received from countries in the low- to middle-income range. These articles tend to be rejected by the top-ranked journals. This can be for racist reasons, but most editors are unaware of this and are shocked by such an allegation, as the reasons for rejection are covered so effectively in the disguises of perceived impact, methodological rigour or writing style that the journal can feel virtuous in rejecting a worthy paper that has nonetheless been subjected to discrimination. The real difference between the 90% and 10% is in capacity. Although we can go some way towards greater equality of opportunity by meeting researchers from these (90%) countries on "their home ground", improve submissions by diligent assessment, detailed recommendations for revision and sympathetic consideration of revised versions, this will not be enough without further training in research methodology and scientific writing, mentoring, personal encouragement, training courses and research collaboration together with increased access to mental health research publications (World Health Organization & Joint Editors, 2004).
If we do not increase research capacity and manuscript development skills, we will continue to take refuge in our open and transparent review process, and convince ourselves that all papers that are accepted are better than those that are rejected. What this process does not acknowledge is that in this contest, to use a sporting analogy, contenders from the 90% are almost always playing uphill and into a howling gale. This is more than a mere question of equity; if we do not acknowledge the contribution of the 90% adequately we may lose essential elements of knowledge in our attempts to develop a complete picture of the aetiology, course and management of mental disorders. The worldwide indexing of psychiatric journals is potentially a great boon and a leveller, but the richer countries could do more to improve regional journals in poorer countries so that their journals can be indexed. Psychiatrists in South Africa, for example, who despite resource problems are carrying out excellent research, have no indexed local journal and so unless they publish elsewhere their contributions will be read by only a few.
ARE WE IMPROVING OUR INTERNATIONAL STATUS?
It is interesting that almost all journals like to describe themselves as international, even if they pursue a narrow agenda that tends to regionalism. At present medical journals tend to pursue excellence rather than fairness and in doing this their eyes are focused far too closely on the impact factor of their journals as the only adequate measure of worth. The publications department of the Royal College of Psychiatrists has been conscious of this subject in recent years but is aware that we have only made modest inroads into being truly international. Nevertheless, we have some reasons to be proud of our international contribution in publication: one of our most successful books (Patel, 2003) is aimed entirely at readers from low- and middle-income countries. International Psychiatry, edited by Hamid Ghodse, is similarly focused and is freely available on the College website (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/publications/internationalPsychiatry.htm). We will be introducing our new online journal for continuing professional development under the editorship of Cornelius Katona later this year, and are constantly thinking about ways of expanding this educational opportunity to other countries, particularly those in the 90%. For some time now the online versions of all three journals published by the College (the British Journal of Psychiatry, Psychiatric Bulletin and Advances in Psychiatric Treatment) have been freely available to 75 of the worlds lowest-income countries.
In increasing capacity we also need to be aware of the need to foster the development of a reservoir of intellectual talent that has the confidence to set its own agenda in the light of local conditions and not simply follow in the tracks of researchers in richer countries. Although the initiative for this has to be indigenous, journal editors in the rich 10% must be careful not to assume that what is opportune and topical in their own country has any such priority with the remaining 90% (e.g. Emsley, 2001).
We also need to celebrate the breadth and quality of papers from low- and
middle-income countries in our journal. In 2004 alone we had two papers that
were unequivocally international (in that they show no selection in favour of
the 10%) describing common mental disorders from a global perspective
(Bhugra & Mastrogianni,
2004; Üstün et
al, 2004), together with useful epidemiological studies
giving interesting cross-national comparisons
(Lee et al, 2004;
Noorbala et al, 2004;
Okulate et al, 2004; Seedat et al, 2004),
excellent examples of collaboration and potential capacity-building between
researchers in richer and low-income countries
(Igreja et al, 2004;
Saravanan et al,
2004; Sumathipala et
al, 2004), as well as informative accounts of the special
problems of psychiatry in India (religious treatment in conflict with
conventional mental health services; Thara
et al, 2004), unusual variations in Nigeria (low
incidence of Alzheimers disease among the Yoruba tribe;
Ayonrinde et al, 2004) and the high rate of dissociative disorders in Egypt
(Okasha, 2004). We have also
published a transcultural supplement in which one low-income country, Uganda,
was a close participant in the research
(Asten et al, 2004).
Several of these contributions were encouraged or invited, and both the
previous editor, Greg Wilkinson, and Andrej Marui
,, our
round the world editor, deserve credit for taking an initiative
here in advance of many other journals in the field. I also propose to
increase the number of corresponding editors from poorer countries to ensure
that we are better able to assess the local context in assessing submitted
articles. In addition, we have begun a small research project into the fate of
articles submitted to the Journal according to the wealth of the
country of origin of their main authors.
Recent world events have served to emphasise our interdependence and remind us that we cannot escape into separate worlds. Perhaps it is this, more than any other perception, that will break down the barriers between the 90% and 10%. I hope that we can continue to pursue this path at the Journal, neither veering too far in the direction of tokenism and political correctness nor lowering our standards in embracing a genuinely more international approach. Often we may have been racist without intention or knowledge, but we can no longer hide behind ignorance. As McKenzie (2003) has reminded us, developing a deeper understanding of possible links between racism and health is a pre-requisite for initiatives to decrease impact at a community and individual level, and so all should gain in the longer term from this increased awareness. We hope that the World Health Organization will be able to host another meeting in a few years time to review the progress of its initiative. We also hope that on the next occasion our colleagues from the Archives of General Psychiatry and the American Journal of Psychiatry will be able to participate. It is a long way to Geneva, but as Mark Twain once observed, travel is fatal to prejudice.
REFERENCES
Asten, P., Marks, M. N. & Oates, M. R.
(2004) Aims, measures, study sites and participant samples of
the Transcultural Study of Postnatal Depression. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 184(suppl. 46), s3
-s9.
Ayonrinde, O., Gureje, O. & Lawal, R.
(2004) Psychiatric research in Nigeria: bridging tradition
and modernisation. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 536
-538.
Bhugra, D. & Mastrogianni, A. (2004)
Globalisation and mental disorders: overview with relation to depression.
British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 10-20.
Emsley, R. (2001) Focus on psychiatry in South
Africa. British Journal of Psychiatry,
178, 382
-386.
Global Forum for Health Research (2000) Helping correct the 10/90 gap. Geneva: Global Forum for Health Research (also see http://www.globalforumhealth.org/).
Goesling, B. (2001) Changing income inequalities within and between nations: new evidence. American Sociological Review, 66, 745 -761.
Horton, R. (2003) Medical journals: evidence of bias against the diseases of poverty. Lancet, 361, 712 -713.[CrossRef][Medline]
Igreja, V., Kleijn, W. C., Schreuder, B. J. N., et al
(2004) Testimony method to ameliorate post-traumatic stress
symptoms: community-based intervention study with Mozambican civil war
survivors. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 251
-257.
Lee, D. T. S., Yip, A. S. K., Leung, T. Y. S., et al
(2004) Ethnoepidemiology of postnatal depression: prospective
multivariate study of sociocultural risk factors in a Chinese population in
Hong Kong. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 34-40.
McKenzie, K. (2003) Racism and health.
BMJ, 326, 65
-66.
Noorbala, A. A., Bagheri Yazdi, S. A., Yasamy, M. T., et
al (2004) Mental health survey of the adult population
in Iran. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 70-73.
Okasha, A. (2004) Focus on psychiatry in Egypt.
British Journal of Psychiatry,
185, 266
-272.
Okulate, G. T., Olayinka, M. O. & Jones, O. B. E.
(2004) Somatic symptoms in depression: evaluation of their
diagnostic weight in an African setting. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 184, 422
-427.
Parker, G. & Parker, K. (2002) A profile of regional psychiatry publishing: home and away. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 693 -696.[CrossRef][Medline]
Patel, V. (2003) Where There Is No Psychiatrist. London: Gaskell.
Patel, V. & Sumathipala, A. (2001)
International representation in psychiatric literature: survey of six leading
journals. British Journal of Psychiatry,
178, 406
-409.
Saravanan, B., Jacob, K. S., Prince, M., et al
(2004) Culture and insight revisited. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 184, 107
-109.
Saxena, S., Levav, I., Maulik, P., et al (2003) How international are the editorial boards of leading psychiatry journals? Lancet, 361, 609.
Seedat, S., Nyamai, C., Njenga, F., et al
(2004) Trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress symptoms in
urban African schools: survey in Cape Town and Nairobi. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 184, 169
-175.
Sumathipala, A., Siribaddana, S. H. & Bhugra, D.
(2004) Culture-bound syndromes: the story of dhat
syndrome. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 200
-209.
Thara, R., Padmavati, R. & Srinivasan, T. N.
(2004) Focus on psychiatry in India. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 184, 363
-373.
Tyrer, P. (2004) From the Editors Desk.
British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 100.
Üstün, T. B., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Chatterji, S.,
et al (2004) Global burden of depressive disorders
in the year 2000. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 386
-392.
World Health Organization & Joint Editors (2004) Galvanising Mental Health Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Role of Scientific Journals. http://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/final_joint_statement.pdf
Received for publication July 19, 2004. Revision received September 13, 2004. Accepted for publication September 13, 2004.