Academic publishing requires linguistically inclusive policies.

Scientific knowledge is produced in multiple languages but is predominantly published in English. This practice creates a language barrier to generate and transfer scientific knowledge between communities with diverse linguistic backgrounds, hindering the ability of scholars and communities to address global challenges and achieve diversity and equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). To overcome those barriers, publishers and journals should provide a fair system that supports non-native English speakers and disseminates knowledge across the globe. We surveyed policies of 736 journals in biological sciences to assess their linguistic inclusivity, identify predictors of inclusivity, and propose actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing. Our assessment revealed a grim landscape where most journals were making minimal efforts to overcome language barriers. The impact factor of journals was negatively associated with adopting a number of inclusive policies whereas ownership by a scientific society tended to have a positive association. Contrary to our expectations, the proportion of both open access articles and editors based in non-English speaking countries did not have a major positive association with the adoption of linguistically inclusive policies. We proposed a set of actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing, including the renegotiation of power dynamics between publishers and editorial boards.

The New Zealand oral and maxillofacial surgeon workforce in 2017-18: characteristics, practice and prospects.

AIM: To describe and consider the findings of a workforce survey of New Zealand Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (OMS) which was conducted in 2017-18, and to compare those to findings from a similar survey undertaken in 2001. METHODS: A questionnaire was used to obtain information on the qualifications, sociodemographic characteristics and and practising circumstances of all practising OMS in New Zealand. Data were analysed using SPSS (version 24). After the computation of descriptive statistics, cross-tabulations were used to identify differences in proportions (with those tested for statistical significance using Chi-squared tests), and analysis of variance was used to examine differences in means. RESULTS: All 39 OMS took part. There were 17 medically qualified surgeons who also held a surgical fellowship, comprising just under half of the workforce. Overall, one in eight surgeons worked solely in the public sector, while just under one-quarter worked solely in private; the remainder worked in both sectors. Dentoalveolar procedures were by far the most common undertaken (with considerably more done by older surgeons than younger ones), followed by implants, the treatment of facial trauma, skin lesions and surgery for malignancy. Orthognathic surgery and dentoalveolar trauma procedures were the least commonly reported. Only two-thirds of surgeons participated in public on-call work. While 95% of surgeons were indeed satisfied with their work, the lowest rate was observed among those working solely in the public sector, where it was 80%; among those working exclusively in private, it was 100%. Between 2001 and 2017-18, the proportion of medically qualified surgeons rose from just over one-quarter to more than two-thirds. The proportion of surgeons working solely in private practice rose from one in seven to almost one-quarter. There were marked increases in the mean number of malignancies dealt with and implants provided. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight a number of problems-some long-standing, others emerging-in New Zealand's OMS system. Fewer surgeons are participating in public sector provision and there is stress on those who remain. Workforce planners should be aware that more resources need to be put into training surgeons who will take up hospital appointments and provide essential after-hours emergency services.

Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide-induced parotitis: A case report.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Drug-induced parotitis is a rare adverse drug reaction (ADR). A comprehensive literature review identified only three clearly associated medications: L-asparaginase, clozapine and phenylbutazone. CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe a novel case of drug-induced parotitis attributed to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Using general and parotitis-specific tools for assessing the probability of an ADR, we estimate the association of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide with parotitis in this case as 'probable'. To our knowledge, this represents the first reported case of parotitis attributable to these medications and provides a valuable learning tool for the assessment of previously unrecognized ADRs.