JAC Editorial Office, 11 The Wharf, 16 Bridge Street, Birmingham B1 2JS, UK
Introduction
Despite a significant increase in the number of articles handled by the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (JAC), improvements in the editorial system and its associated technology have allowed us to improve manuscript processing times significantly. However, the sustained annual increases in submissions to JAC have necessitated a re-evaluation of the criteria for acceptance of manuscripts, and an increase in the rejection rate. We are aware that authors who have had papers rejected may be puzzled when they judge the articles would have been accepted in previous years. This Editorial has been written in the hope that an appreciation of these factors on the part of authors will encourage submission of higher quality articles for consideration by JAC.
Rejection rate
The number of articles submitted to JAC for consideration has approximately doubled over the last 5 years. The Journal is constrained by the number of pages, and hence the number of articles, it is able to publish annually.
The increase in the number of papers submitted has therefore had to be matched by a steady increase in the percentage of papers that are rejected in order to keep the number of pages published annually relatively constant; the rejection rate was 40% 5 years ago and is now
50%. The immediate effect of this is that it is more difficult to get a paper accepted for publication in JAC than it was 5 years ago. At present the submission rate continues to rise and therefore we anticipate that getting an article accepted by JAC will continue to become more difficult.
Increasing numbers of submissions and the need to reject a higher proportion places an extra burden on referees, and in particular, the Editors. The Editors are increasingly called upon to make fine judgements about the relative merits of articles and, regrettably, to reject articles that might have been accepted in previous years. This has inevitably caused an increased number of rejections where the authors may feel aggrieved; this is unfortunate but it cannot be avoided.
We took measures in 2003 to save space in the journal (reducing some font sizes, eliminating blank pages, reducing the number of authors required in the references). We have also encouraged Editors to ask for papers to be shortened, when they feel this to be appropriate. Both measures aim to increase the number of articles we are able to publish annually. JAC publishes 25% more articles than 5 years ago.
Inevitably, this has created more work for the Editors. The message to authors is to keep their papers as concise as possible, which will enhance their chances of acceptance. In particular, we encourage authors of short papers to consider submitting to the Correspondence section. We are aware that some authors worry that Correspondence may have less impact than a full paper, but would like to remind authors that it is the perceived quality and importance of the findings that determines the number of citations an article receives, not its length; some of the most highly cited JAC articles have appeared in the Correspondence section.1,2
In addition, we encourage authors to add value to their articles. For example, an article that reports the resistance rate in an organism to a particular antimicrobial is less likely to be favourably considered than a similar article that includes information on the resistance mechanism or links the resistance rate to data on prescribing. Articles should not only describe but also attempt to explain, and hence offer insights into probable fruitful interventions, where possible.
We have continued with an active programme of commissioning antiviral reviews as part of a policy of increasing the profile of the Journal in this area. To keep the burden on the Editors as light as possible, we have temporarily scaled back commissioning of antibacterial review material, since finding space for it in the Journal would inevitably mean increasing the rejection rate further. However, high-calibre reviews are always welcome.
Time to publication
Despite the very substantial increase in the number of articles received by JAC over the last few years, we are pleased to be able to report that average manuscript handling times have fallen over this period. In 1999 the average time from receipt to publication was 287 days; for the sample of 71 JAC papers described in this article it was 150 days. Although we should acknowledge that online publication ahead of print was not available in 1999, this represents a 47% reduction in average time from receipt to publication.
The fall in handling times is multifactorial in origin. The major contributions have been made by the following changes: (i) JAC now has an increased number of Editors covering as wide a spectrum of specialities within antimicrobial chemotherapy as possible, and this has to some extent reduced the burden on individual Editors, enabling them to improve handling times; (ii) adoption of the Manuscript Central online manuscript submission and review system has removed communication delays associated with mail and proved extremely popular with the overwhelming majority of authors and reviewers; (iii) reductions in the time taken to generate proofs, allied with the introduction of online publication of articles ahead of the print issue in JAC Advance Access, have greatly curtailed the time taken for an article to progress from acceptance to publication.
We have conducted a limited survey of times from receipt to online publication for original research articles published in four of the leading specialist antimicrobial journals during the period December 2004 to February 2005. Figure 1 shows that the median time from submission to online publication for JAC was 4.7 months (142 days), compared with 5.8 months for the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents (178 days), 7.4 months for Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (224 days) and 8.1 months for Clinical Microbiology and Infection (247 days). As might be expected, there was considerable variation in the number of qualifying articles published in this time (range 33206; see Figure legend).
|
The latest (2003) impact factors for these journals were 4.246 (AAC), 3.080 (JAC), 2.238 (CMI) and 1.950 (IJAA). Submitting authors will need to weigh any perceived advantage of publication in a journal with a higher impact factor against the potential benefit of more rapid publication (and hence earlier citation opportunities).
We are confident that those authors who are fortunate enough to have an article accepted for publication in JAC will appreciate the reduction in time to publication, which means that their findings are available to the scientific community and ready to be cited much sooner than in previous years. JAC does not offer fast-track publication as such. However, if authors believe that their article is of high importance to the antimicrobial community, they are at liberty to mention this during submission. High-quality, important articles that are well written and concise will naturally tend to progress through the system more quickly.
Conclusions
We hope that authors of articles that are rejected will appreciate the reasons behind the increased rejection rate, and will have gained some insight into how to improve their chances of acceptance. The reduction in time to publication is good news for the authors of articles accepted for publication in JAC, and the antimicrobial research community in general.
References
1
.
Hiramatsu K, Hanaki H, Ino T et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinical strain with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 40: 1356.
2
.
Wilson P, Andrews J A, Charlesworth R et al. Linezolid resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 51: 1868.
|