E DI TO R IA L
BJD
British Journal of Dermatology
Editorials in the British Journal of Dermatology
DOI: 10.1111/bjd.13312 ‘Editorials are short essays that usually reflect the views of the editor or the policies of the journal,’ so says the American Medical Association Manual of Style.1 These literary compositions may be on any subject. For the British Journal of Dermatology, editorials tend to fall into one of four categories: comment on articles in the same issue of the journal, discourse on the process of writing and publishing research, professional issues concerning scholarly endeavour and patient care in dermatology, or ad hoc editorials on hot topics in dermatology. Who writes editorials for the BJD? In the past it was common for editorials in journals to be anonymous. This is now rare owing to the need for authorship responsibility and accountability. Most BJD editorials are written by the editor or section editors. This is not a random process; the editorial team meet regularly and are agreed that editorials represent an opportunity to highlight important research and to explain journal policies and procedures. For example, the BJD editorial team regard publication ethics as an increasingly important issue; this topic has been the subject of a recent editorial.2 If the BJD is to maintain its present position as one of the most highly cited dermatology journals, a strong reputation in publication ethics is essential. For hot topics, an expert from outside the editorial team might be invited to write the editorial. BJD editorials in 2013–14 have also included a series of anniversary essays from the elite of academic dermatology. These articles celebrate the BJD’s 125-year anniversary with personal reflections on each author’s own field of dermatological research, highlighting important past discoveries and mapping out the direction of travel for future research. It has been a treat for BJD readers to enjoy these scholarly accounts of the recent past, and enlightening to read predictions about where dermatology research should go in the future. How does the creation of editorials work in practice? Comment on articles in the same issue most commonly takes the form of commentaries; these serve to highlight important or interesting research articles and to place them in context for generalists and trainees. Commentaries are typically 400–600 words long with five to 10 references, and are written by experts in the subject area. These pieces create added value for authors by acting as signposts for readers, directing them to the issue’s most important and original articles. Commentaries are often written by one of the article’s peer reviewers, recognizing that their selection as a peer reviewer was owing to their expertise in the subject. Occasionally, an original article is so significant that the peer reviewers suggest an editorial rather than a commentary. Typically, editorials are longer and more discursive than commentaries. The publication of an ori© 2014 British Association of Dermatologists
ginal article and an accompanying editorial is the journal’s way of indicating a ‘must read’ paper. Importantly, the editorial acts as an extra hook for readers, thereby increasing the chance of the paper being identified and read by the intended audience. For example, a recent editorial concerned an original article that was highlighted as being important during the peer-review process.3,4 In contrast, editorials may sometimes focus on a paper as an opportunity for the journal to explain a change in policy or to drum up interest in a particular category of original research. For example, an editorial earlier this year used a health services research paper as a chance to explore the topic of innovation in dermatology.5,6 What about editorials on the process of writing and publishing research? This remains a core subject for BJD editorials, being so close to the fundamentals of publishing academic work. A recent BJD editorial explored the question ‘why write?’.7 By chance, this question was answered in an editorial in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology;8 Paul Bergstresser stated, ‘Writing is the most important communication activity that we engage in. Not only is it a fundamental means of communication, but it is through examining your own written words that you can be certain that you understand a subject. Write it down and you will learn whether you know what you are talking about.’ Recent BJD editorials have explored the topics of article titles and abstracts.9,10 These editorials provided guidance for authors on how to write engaging and informative titles and abstracts to enhance their original research and optimize identification by search engines. Thus, the editorial serves as an opportunity to guide potential authors, as well as emphasizing the likes and dislikes of the editorial team. The aim is to create a personality and identity for the journal that the academic community knows and trusts. Editorials on professional issues concerning scholarly endeavour and patient care in dermatology provide the BJD with further opportunities to articulate the values of the journal. For example, our policy on commissioned scholarly reviews highlighted the primacy of expertise, scholarship and conciseness in review articles over long, comprehensive reviews where these qualities may sometimes be lacking.11 Scholarly endeavour has also been explored in recent editorials on reading (and thinking) and peer review.12,13 Patient care in dermatology increasingly involves helping our patients to understand complex issues addressed by contemporary research. Free online access to plain-language summaries of BJD original articles is intended to help this by opening up BJD content to patients and patient groups.14 An editorial explained this new policy by emphasizing the aims of the journal: ‘to advance understanding, management and treatment of skin disease to improve patient outcomes’. In effect, the BJD British Journal of Dermatology (2014) 171, pp441–442
441
442 Editorial
was saying, ‘Let’s include our patients in this enterprise by explaining the science in plain language that can be easily understood.’ This initiative shows the BJD connecting with patients and joining with others (most notably the Journal of Investigative Dermatology)15,16 by taking a lead on patient advocacy. All dermatologists are familiar with the importance of including their patients in important decision making concerning the investigation and care of their skin disease. However, fewer may be aware of the evolution of shared decision making as an academic discipline in its own right; there is more to this than simply following your instincts. A recent BJD editorial, coauthored with a leading academic in the field of shared decision making, described how this approach to the practice of medicine has flourished where multiple treatment options are available, such as for psoriasis.17 This BJD editorial highlighted the need for patient-friendly decision-making aids to be developed and validated to underpin excellence in shared decision making, thereby indicating a desire for the BJD to publish such research. With excellent timing, shared decision making was the topic for prize-winning research presented at the 94th annual meeting of the British Association of Dermatologists.18 How about ad hoc editorials on hot topics? No topic is hotter in dermatology at present than the role of sentinel node biopsy in melanoma care. Indeed, this topic has generated much heat and little light, in spite of increasing published clinical trial evidence. What is the role of the journal when faced with such divided opinion? To focus on the need to explain what is going on to generalists and to dermatology trainees. A BJD editorial published in 2013 did just this, in measured terms and with balance.19 This topic remains hot, with more BJD editorial comment anticipated to explain and guide dermatologists throughout the world, as new evidence is generated. Another hot topic for a recent BJD editorial concerned sunbeds and legislation.20 This editorial provided a tour of the topic guided by an expert, to provide context, comment and expert opinion at the very moment when dermatology was in the spotlight. Thus, BJD editorials conform to the definition of the American Medical Association Manual of Style, which opened this piece: carefully crafted, short essays that are used to reflect the views of the editorial team and the policies of the journal. In so doing, they provide us with opportunities to articulate professional and academic opinion as representatives of the journal. Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Royal Gwent Hospital, Cardiff Road, Newport, Gwent NP20 2UB, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]
British Journal of Dermatology (2014) 171, pp441–442
A. ANSTEY
References 1 JAMA & Archives Journals. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors (Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, Glass RM, Gregoline B et al., eds), 10th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 2 Anstey A. Authorship issues: grizzles, ghosts and guests. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1209–10. 3 Williams HC. A TREAT in store for those wishing to identify uncertainties in the treatment of severe childhood eczema. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:731–2. 4 Proudfoot LE, Powell AM, Aysi S et al. The European treatment of severe atopic eczema in children taskforce (TREAT) survey. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:901–9. 5 Oostveen AM, Beulens CA, van de Kerkhof PC et al. The effectiveness and safety of short-contact dithranol therapy in paediatric psoriasis: a prospective comparison of regular day care with telemedicine. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:454–7. 6 Anstey A. Innovation in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:229–30. 7 Anstey A. Why write? Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:1173–4. 8 Bergstresser PR. Effecting professional unity. J Invest Dermatol 2013; 133:2653–5. 9 Anstey A. Writing style: what’s in a title? Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1003–4. 10 Anstey A. Writing style: abstract thoughts. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171:205–6. 11 Anstey A, Bleiker T. Commissioned scholarly reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:1. 12 Anstey A. Reading the British Journal of Dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:729–30. 13 Anstey A. Peer reviewing and publishing: the yin and yang of academia. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:489–90. 14 Anstey A. Plain language summaries in the British Journal of Dermatology: connecting with patients. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1–3. 15 Bergstresser PR. It’s all about patients. J Invest Dermatol 2010; 130:1–2. 16 Nijsten T, Bergstresser PR. Patient advocacy groups: let’s stick together. J Invest Dermatol 2010; 130:1757–9. 17 Anstey A, Edwards A. Shared decision making in dermatology: asking patients, ‘what is important to you?’ Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:759–60. 18 Farrell E, Whistance R, Lloyd A et al. Shared decision-making in plaque psoriasis: development of an Option Grid to assist in decisions to commence oral therapy. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171(Suppl. 1):7. 19 McGregor JM. Too much surgery and too little benefit? Sentinel node biopsy for melanoma as it currently stands. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:233–5. 20 Diffey B. Sunbeds and young people: an easy target for legislation. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:236–7.
© 2014 British Association of Dermatologists
BJD
British Journal of Dermatology
Editorials in the British Journal of Dermatology
DOI: 10.1111/bjd.13312 ‘Editorials are short essays that usually reflect the views of the editor or the policies of the journal,’ so says the American Medical Association Manual of Style.1 These literary compositions may be on any subject. For the British Journal of Dermatology, editorials tend to fall into one of four categories: comment on articles in the same issue of the journal, discourse on the process of writing and publishing research, professional issues concerning scholarly endeavour and patient care in dermatology, or ad hoc editorials on hot topics in dermatology. Who writes editorials for the BJD? In the past it was common for editorials in journals to be anonymous. This is now rare owing to the need for authorship responsibility and accountability. Most BJD editorials are written by the editor or section editors. This is not a random process; the editorial team meet regularly and are agreed that editorials represent an opportunity to highlight important research and to explain journal policies and procedures. For example, the BJD editorial team regard publication ethics as an increasingly important issue; this topic has been the subject of a recent editorial.2 If the BJD is to maintain its present position as one of the most highly cited dermatology journals, a strong reputation in publication ethics is essential. For hot topics, an expert from outside the editorial team might be invited to write the editorial. BJD editorials in 2013–14 have also included a series of anniversary essays from the elite of academic dermatology. These articles celebrate the BJD’s 125-year anniversary with personal reflections on each author’s own field of dermatological research, highlighting important past discoveries and mapping out the direction of travel for future research. It has been a treat for BJD readers to enjoy these scholarly accounts of the recent past, and enlightening to read predictions about where dermatology research should go in the future. How does the creation of editorials work in practice? Comment on articles in the same issue most commonly takes the form of commentaries; these serve to highlight important or interesting research articles and to place them in context for generalists and trainees. Commentaries are typically 400–600 words long with five to 10 references, and are written by experts in the subject area. These pieces create added value for authors by acting as signposts for readers, directing them to the issue’s most important and original articles. Commentaries are often written by one of the article’s peer reviewers, recognizing that their selection as a peer reviewer was owing to their expertise in the subject. Occasionally, an original article is so significant that the peer reviewers suggest an editorial rather than a commentary. Typically, editorials are longer and more discursive than commentaries. The publication of an ori© 2014 British Association of Dermatologists
ginal article and an accompanying editorial is the journal’s way of indicating a ‘must read’ paper. Importantly, the editorial acts as an extra hook for readers, thereby increasing the chance of the paper being identified and read by the intended audience. For example, a recent editorial concerned an original article that was highlighted as being important during the peer-review process.3,4 In contrast, editorials may sometimes focus on a paper as an opportunity for the journal to explain a change in policy or to drum up interest in a particular category of original research. For example, an editorial earlier this year used a health services research paper as a chance to explore the topic of innovation in dermatology.5,6 What about editorials on the process of writing and publishing research? This remains a core subject for BJD editorials, being so close to the fundamentals of publishing academic work. A recent BJD editorial explored the question ‘why write?’.7 By chance, this question was answered in an editorial in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology;8 Paul Bergstresser stated, ‘Writing is the most important communication activity that we engage in. Not only is it a fundamental means of communication, but it is through examining your own written words that you can be certain that you understand a subject. Write it down and you will learn whether you know what you are talking about.’ Recent BJD editorials have explored the topics of article titles and abstracts.9,10 These editorials provided guidance for authors on how to write engaging and informative titles and abstracts to enhance their original research and optimize identification by search engines. Thus, the editorial serves as an opportunity to guide potential authors, as well as emphasizing the likes and dislikes of the editorial team. The aim is to create a personality and identity for the journal that the academic community knows and trusts. Editorials on professional issues concerning scholarly endeavour and patient care in dermatology provide the BJD with further opportunities to articulate the values of the journal. For example, our policy on commissioned scholarly reviews highlighted the primacy of expertise, scholarship and conciseness in review articles over long, comprehensive reviews where these qualities may sometimes be lacking.11 Scholarly endeavour has also been explored in recent editorials on reading (and thinking) and peer review.12,13 Patient care in dermatology increasingly involves helping our patients to understand complex issues addressed by contemporary research. Free online access to plain-language summaries of BJD original articles is intended to help this by opening up BJD content to patients and patient groups.14 An editorial explained this new policy by emphasizing the aims of the journal: ‘to advance understanding, management and treatment of skin disease to improve patient outcomes’. In effect, the BJD British Journal of Dermatology (2014) 171, pp441–442
441
442 Editorial
was saying, ‘Let’s include our patients in this enterprise by explaining the science in plain language that can be easily understood.’ This initiative shows the BJD connecting with patients and joining with others (most notably the Journal of Investigative Dermatology)15,16 by taking a lead on patient advocacy. All dermatologists are familiar with the importance of including their patients in important decision making concerning the investigation and care of their skin disease. However, fewer may be aware of the evolution of shared decision making as an academic discipline in its own right; there is more to this than simply following your instincts. A recent BJD editorial, coauthored with a leading academic in the field of shared decision making, described how this approach to the practice of medicine has flourished where multiple treatment options are available, such as for psoriasis.17 This BJD editorial highlighted the need for patient-friendly decision-making aids to be developed and validated to underpin excellence in shared decision making, thereby indicating a desire for the BJD to publish such research. With excellent timing, shared decision making was the topic for prize-winning research presented at the 94th annual meeting of the British Association of Dermatologists.18 How about ad hoc editorials on hot topics? No topic is hotter in dermatology at present than the role of sentinel node biopsy in melanoma care. Indeed, this topic has generated much heat and little light, in spite of increasing published clinical trial evidence. What is the role of the journal when faced with such divided opinion? To focus on the need to explain what is going on to generalists and to dermatology trainees. A BJD editorial published in 2013 did just this, in measured terms and with balance.19 This topic remains hot, with more BJD editorial comment anticipated to explain and guide dermatologists throughout the world, as new evidence is generated. Another hot topic for a recent BJD editorial concerned sunbeds and legislation.20 This editorial provided a tour of the topic guided by an expert, to provide context, comment and expert opinion at the very moment when dermatology was in the spotlight. Thus, BJD editorials conform to the definition of the American Medical Association Manual of Style, which opened this piece: carefully crafted, short essays that are used to reflect the views of the editorial team and the policies of the journal. In so doing, they provide us with opportunities to articulate professional and academic opinion as representatives of the journal. Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Royal Gwent Hospital, Cardiff Road, Newport, Gwent NP20 2UB, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]
British Journal of Dermatology (2014) 171, pp441–442
A. ANSTEY
References 1 JAMA & Archives Journals. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors (Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, Glass RM, Gregoline B et al., eds), 10th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 2 Anstey A. Authorship issues: grizzles, ghosts and guests. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1209–10. 3 Williams HC. A TREAT in store for those wishing to identify uncertainties in the treatment of severe childhood eczema. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:731–2. 4 Proudfoot LE, Powell AM, Aysi S et al. The European treatment of severe atopic eczema in children taskforce (TREAT) survey. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:901–9. 5 Oostveen AM, Beulens CA, van de Kerkhof PC et al. The effectiveness and safety of short-contact dithranol therapy in paediatric psoriasis: a prospective comparison of regular day care with telemedicine. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:454–7. 6 Anstey A. Innovation in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:229–30. 7 Anstey A. Why write? Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:1173–4. 8 Bergstresser PR. Effecting professional unity. J Invest Dermatol 2013; 133:2653–5. 9 Anstey A. Writing style: what’s in a title? Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1003–4. 10 Anstey A. Writing style: abstract thoughts. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171:205–6. 11 Anstey A, Bleiker T. Commissioned scholarly reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:1. 12 Anstey A. Reading the British Journal of Dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:729–30. 13 Anstey A. Peer reviewing and publishing: the yin and yang of academia. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:489–90. 14 Anstey A. Plain language summaries in the British Journal of Dermatology: connecting with patients. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:1–3. 15 Bergstresser PR. It’s all about patients. J Invest Dermatol 2010; 130:1–2. 16 Nijsten T, Bergstresser PR. Patient advocacy groups: let’s stick together. J Invest Dermatol 2010; 130:1757–9. 17 Anstey A, Edwards A. Shared decision making in dermatology: asking patients, ‘what is important to you?’ Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:759–60. 18 Farrell E, Whistance R, Lloyd A et al. Shared decision-making in plaque psoriasis: development of an Option Grid to assist in decisions to commence oral therapy. Br J Dermatol 2014; 171(Suppl. 1):7. 19 McGregor JM. Too much surgery and too little benefit? Sentinel node biopsy for melanoma as it currently stands. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:233–5. 20 Diffey B. Sunbeds and young people: an easy target for legislation. Br J Dermatol 2013; 169:236–7.
© 2014 British Association of Dermatologists
