bs_bs_banner
doi:10.1111/jpc.12525
EDITORIAL
Editorial freedom: The trials and tribulations of being an editor When assessing the ethical issues relevant to a clinical situation, it is common to develop a list of the burdens and benefits. Recently, it occurred to me that it might be interesting to do the same for an editor’s existence, but on reflection, I decided it was unwise to risk it. One frustration of being an editor is the impossibility of publishing all submitted papers. The major journals only publish around 5% of submitted papers. Currently, we publish 40–50% in the Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health (JPCH), and although we can publish online very soon after acceptance, we developed a large backlog of papers accepted for publication but waiting to appear in print. To overcome this backlog, we have published some electronic-only issues, a process which has reduced the average time between acceptance and publication in print from over 12 months to 6–7 months. We often hear from authors who are frustrated at the length of time before a decision is made on a submitted manuscript. The editors have reduced the average time from submission to first decision from 70 days in 2009 to 57 days in 2012 and the time from submission to final decision from 106 to 81 days. The major holdup is in getting reviewers to agree to review papers and to submit their reviews. The peer review process can be criticised as potentially biased. However, the more reviews a paper receives, the lower the risk of bias. To this end, we beg those of you asked to review papers to reflect on the altruistic reasons to say yes before exercising the academic reflex to say no because of the imminence of your next grant application. We should all aspire to an educational spiral: the more ready we are to review papers for the journal, the more likely are others to review our own submitted papers. The biggest joy of being an editor is the self-indulgent one of having a degree of control over the journal’s subject matter. At a recent meeting, I had the privilege and the pleasure of introducing Richard Horton, the charismatic editor-in-chief of the Lancet, who gave a presentation on How to Get Published. I noted that the Lancet’s Impact Factor (the average number of times articles in a journal are cited) approximated its editor’s age whereas you have to multiply the JPCH Impact Factor by 50 to get my age. The main message was that the topic of papers should be important and relevant. Under Richard, the Lancet has made a conscious decision to push a global health agenda with a strong emphasis on neonatal and child health, and all power to him. Fiona Godlee, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), has made an equally conscious decision to make the BMJ entertaining and readable by publishing papers on a wide range of topics and by publishing one-page summaries of research papers in the paper version of the BMJ, with the full research article restricted to the electronic version. The JPCH strives to publish papers relevant to general paediatricians and surgeons. Those submitting papers should read and adhere carefully to the Instructions to Authors (http:// mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jpch) in terms of length and format. All our papers, including editorials, are peer reviewed.
Unfortunately, the journal consists of monologues because we almost never receive correspondence, in the form of an email or letter, commenting on the content of any articles published in the JPCH. We would much prefer a dialogue or rather a multilogue. I have previously confessed to my ignorance of all things technical.1 We have now appointed a young editor, Chris Elliot, who is contrastingly technically adept and has set up a series of online ways of communicating your views immediately through digital media; including via email, Facebook and Twitter. As of this issue, readers will be able to use the new JPCH Online Portal (www.JPCHonline.com) as a single site to access Online First publications, current and past print editions, log-in via RACP and start a conversation. We value your feedback in this new initiative and plan to adjust and expand this service over time. Please contact us with your thoughts, suggestions or letters to the Editor at any time by email on [email protected] or by visiting www.JPCHonline.com. Interestingly, Chris reviewed rapid responses to major journals and found that very, very few readers posted comments despite massive numbers of electronic visitors to the journals’ websites. We urge readers of the JPCH to buck this trend and to enter into a vigorous conversation about current controversies. We are very keen to hear your views and for you to assume ownership of the JPCH and of its current and future direction. The aim of the JPCH is to inform, to educate, to entertain and to make readers think. We want paediatric physicians and surgeons to feel you own the journal, and we encourage you to contribute to your JPCH.
Reference 1 Isaacs D. Technophobia. J. Paediatr. Child Health 2012; 48: 625.
Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 50 (2014) 169 © 2014 The Author Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2014 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians)
Prof David Isaacs Editor-in-Chief
169
doi:10.1111/jpc.12525
EDITORIAL
Editorial freedom: The trials and tribulations of being an editor When assessing the ethical issues relevant to a clinical situation, it is common to develop a list of the burdens and benefits. Recently, it occurred to me that it might be interesting to do the same for an editor’s existence, but on reflection, I decided it was unwise to risk it. One frustration of being an editor is the impossibility of publishing all submitted papers. The major journals only publish around 5% of submitted papers. Currently, we publish 40–50% in the Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health (JPCH), and although we can publish online very soon after acceptance, we developed a large backlog of papers accepted for publication but waiting to appear in print. To overcome this backlog, we have published some electronic-only issues, a process which has reduced the average time between acceptance and publication in print from over 12 months to 6–7 months. We often hear from authors who are frustrated at the length of time before a decision is made on a submitted manuscript. The editors have reduced the average time from submission to first decision from 70 days in 2009 to 57 days in 2012 and the time from submission to final decision from 106 to 81 days. The major holdup is in getting reviewers to agree to review papers and to submit their reviews. The peer review process can be criticised as potentially biased. However, the more reviews a paper receives, the lower the risk of bias. To this end, we beg those of you asked to review papers to reflect on the altruistic reasons to say yes before exercising the academic reflex to say no because of the imminence of your next grant application. We should all aspire to an educational spiral: the more ready we are to review papers for the journal, the more likely are others to review our own submitted papers. The biggest joy of being an editor is the self-indulgent one of having a degree of control over the journal’s subject matter. At a recent meeting, I had the privilege and the pleasure of introducing Richard Horton, the charismatic editor-in-chief of the Lancet, who gave a presentation on How to Get Published. I noted that the Lancet’s Impact Factor (the average number of times articles in a journal are cited) approximated its editor’s age whereas you have to multiply the JPCH Impact Factor by 50 to get my age. The main message was that the topic of papers should be important and relevant. Under Richard, the Lancet has made a conscious decision to push a global health agenda with a strong emphasis on neonatal and child health, and all power to him. Fiona Godlee, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), has made an equally conscious decision to make the BMJ entertaining and readable by publishing papers on a wide range of topics and by publishing one-page summaries of research papers in the paper version of the BMJ, with the full research article restricted to the electronic version. The JPCH strives to publish papers relevant to general paediatricians and surgeons. Those submitting papers should read and adhere carefully to the Instructions to Authors (http:// mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jpch) in terms of length and format. All our papers, including editorials, are peer reviewed.
Unfortunately, the journal consists of monologues because we almost never receive correspondence, in the form of an email or letter, commenting on the content of any articles published in the JPCH. We would much prefer a dialogue or rather a multilogue. I have previously confessed to my ignorance of all things technical.1 We have now appointed a young editor, Chris Elliot, who is contrastingly technically adept and has set up a series of online ways of communicating your views immediately through digital media; including via email, Facebook and Twitter. As of this issue, readers will be able to use the new JPCH Online Portal (www.JPCHonline.com) as a single site to access Online First publications, current and past print editions, log-in via RACP and start a conversation. We value your feedback in this new initiative and plan to adjust and expand this service over time. Please contact us with your thoughts, suggestions or letters to the Editor at any time by email on [email protected] or by visiting www.JPCHonline.com. Interestingly, Chris reviewed rapid responses to major journals and found that very, very few readers posted comments despite massive numbers of electronic visitors to the journals’ websites. We urge readers of the JPCH to buck this trend and to enter into a vigorous conversation about current controversies. We are very keen to hear your views and for you to assume ownership of the JPCH and of its current and future direction. The aim of the JPCH is to inform, to educate, to entertain and to make readers think. We want paediatric physicians and surgeons to feel you own the journal, and we encourage you to contribute to your JPCH.
Reference 1 Isaacs D. Technophobia. J. Paediatr. Child Health 2012; 48: 625.
Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 50 (2014) 169 © 2014 The Author Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2014 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians)
Prof David Isaacs Editor-in-Chief
169
