[Correspondence] Gender gap, disparity, and inequality in peer review
In an edition of the New England Journal of Medicine,1 the thanks to the “super reviewers”, caught our eye—ie, reviewers that have reviewed two or more papers. However, when we examined these 282 names, we were surprised that only 52 (18%) are women and 230 (82%) are men. We then looked at 10 years’ worth of reviewers (many journals do not list reviewers regularly or uniformly, and therefore gender is difficult to assess). We carried out the first assessment with Excel, but we realised reviewing thousands of names was daunting.