© 2003 American Thoracic Society DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.F275
Transition, Sunlight, and the Art of Journal MaintenancePulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, and Department of Cell Biology and Physiology Washington University School of Medicine St. Louis, Missouri Address correspondence to: M. J. Holtzman, M.D., Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8052, 660 South Euclid Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63110. E-mail: holtzmanm{at}msnotes.wustl.edu It's a sunny, Sunday afternoon (before a Monday deadline), and it's time to write my fifth and final annual report as Editor of the AJRCMB. So, for one last time, let me provide a state-of-the-Journal, a plan for its transition to a new editorial regime, and some (almost) lame-duck suggestions about maintaining future editorial goals. From any standpoint (subjective or objective), the last five years of the Journal have seen significant challenge and consequent change. Highlights include: institution of centralized peer-review and production staff for a new ATS and its new headquarters; conversion to electronic submission and peer review; upregulation of Perspectives and development of Translational Reviews; and expansion and internationalization of the group of Associate Editors and Editorial Board members. These changes have had an impact on the performance of the AJRCMB. Turnaround time from manuscript submission to first decision has decreased from a mean of 61 to 28 days, and continues to shorten. Publication lag from final manuscript acceptance to appearance in print has been decreased by 4–5 months, and has been nullified further by the near-immediate online posting of articles under Articles In Press. In addition, the publication of Perspectives has increased from 3 in 1998 to 26–31 per year in 2000–2002, while Workshop Summaries, Pro-Con Editorials, and Translational Reviews have begun to appear. A supplement (the first for the Journal) covering the new Pittsburgh Lung Conference is also in the works. There's even been, maybe not yet a foot, but at least a toe in the doorway to advertising in the Journal. In turn, the improvements in the Journal have led to positive actions on the audience for the Journal. Perhaps the most tangible evidence of customer satisfaction is the manuscript submission rate. This year the Journal is on track for an all-time high of processing 450 original manuscripts per year, an increase of 12% over 2002, and 32% over 2001. This does not even take into account the increased number of invited submissions for Perspectives and Translational Reviews. Moreover, submissions now arrive from 39 different countries, and, in general, about half of the submissions come from outside the United States. In line with the desire to maintain costs (and Journal size), the increased rate of submission has led to a concomitant decline in acceptance rate from a high of 49% to 34%. The hope is that this heightened stringency will be reflected in an ongoing improvement in the scientific quality of the Journal, recognizing that it is already rated at the top of its field. These achievements were no doubt driven at least in part by full conversion to electronic submission, review, and publication; but the performances of editors, reviewers, and staff deserve the major credit. Indeed, we have achieved significant stability in the editorial and administrative workforce that supports the AJRCMB. The masthead now holds 19 Associate Editors, and it has come to represent the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and Canada in addition to the United States. The Editorial Board is even more global and is extremely responsive. The staff in New York is also reliable, attentive, knowledgeable, and dedicated. Taken together, their performance proves that an editorial operation comprised of nonprofessional academics and very professional staff can still produce a high-quality publication for medical research in an increasingly competitive environment. So, where do we go from here? First, over the next 3 months, the Journal will transition to a new editorship directed by Dr. Steven D. Shapiro. Whether by luck or fate, it is remarkable that Dr. Shapiro will represent the fourth (out of four) Journal editorships to have enjoyed some heritage at Washington University in St. Louis. The shared bondage serves as a useful communication device, because the common ancestry will make the editorial rollover once again a seamless process. Dr. Shapiro and I have certainly worked closely together on many other issues over the years (including his tenure as Deputy Editor), and we have carefully planned for a changeover in October to coincide with the new season. Steve's outstanding scientific insight and his rich current surroundings at Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston will both be major new assets for the Journal. In signing out, I note that the Journal is still only 15 years old, and so remains in a growth and development phase. Recognizing that the organism is just a teenager, let me leave the respiratory readership and the ATS membership-at-large with just a few possibilities for the next phase of maturation. In particular, the AJRCMB (as is true for other competitive journals) will need to continue to work on its front end, where invited articles appear. This aspect of the Journal has been extremely popular. Acccordingly, continued diligence for soliciting Perspectives and Translational Reviews, as well as the development of new categories such as Research News or Topical Series for scientific- and disease-specific issues, might be considered to further spark reader interest and popular acceptance. In that regard, the Journal should continue its special role to bridge the gap between its scientifically and its more clinically oriented audiences. The Translational Reviews represent first steps in that direction, but additional cross-talk with the AJRCCM is also desirable. Articles and commentary that are directly linked to the other more clinical respiratory journal(s) could serve as a useful device for uniting the respiratory community and improving understanding of lung biology in health and disease. This last point is a critical one, because at its inception and in its further development, some have questioned (and will always question) the need for a separate respiratory journal with a slant toward basic scientific mechanism. Similarly, members of the respiratory society are often unpersuaded to take advantage of this type of fundamental knowledge, because it appears either incomprehensible or irrelevant. My view is that the AJRCMB is (by design) charged with a special responsibility to change this unfortunate circumstance. Medical practice in general, and respiratory medicine in particular, will only achieve its goals for better health care by taking advantage of new knowledge in the basic aspects of respiratory research. At times, the scientific community is only partially capable of communicating this knowledge in a format that is understandable to the more practical side of the respiratory system. But both sides must resist the inclination to isolate themselves. The AJRCCM and AJRCMB, although distinct in certain approaches and outlooks, must overlap and coordinate as well. This combination of basic and applied perspectives will allow for synergies that can translate into a much greater understanding of, and consequent therapy for, lung diseases than would otherwise be possible. In closing, I would note that the legacy of personnel still involved with the AJRCMB fully understand these communication issues and will no doubt make every attempt to address them. Indeed, the ATS leadership and membership also appreciate that this continued commitment to high science is one of the critical features that distinguishes the ATS from other medical organizations. To all of these dedicated and truly remarkable Journal-related individuals, I wish to extend my sincerest thanks. Without their outstanding performance, it would not have been possible for the Journal to succeed, nor would it be able to continue to improve. The future of the Journal is a bright one, and I will remember well these building times when the sun comes out on my future Sunday afternoons (and I have a different deadline for Monday). This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
