Refereeing system of 29 life science journals preferred by Japanese scientists

Too many journals? Towards a theory of repeated rejections and ultimate acceptance

Under a set of reasonable assumptions, it is shown that all manuscripts submitted to any journal will ultimately be published, either by the first journal or by one of the following journals to which a manuscript is resubmitted. This suggests that low quality manuscripts may also be published, which further suggests that there may be too many journals.

Using journal impact factors to correct for the publication bias of medical studies

Publication bias of the results of medical studies can invalidate evidence-based medicine. The existing methodology for modeling this essentially relies upon the symmetry of the funnel plot. We present a new method of modeling publication bias that uses this information plus the impact factors of the publishing journals. A simple model of the publication process enables the estimation of bias-corrected intervention effects. The procedure is illustrated using a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of single-dose oral aspirin for acute pain, and results are also obtained for five other meta-analyses. The method enables the fitting of a wide range of models and is considered more flexible than other ways of compensating for publication bias. The model also provides the basis of a statistical test for the existence of publication bias. Use of the new methodology to supplement existing methods is recommended, in the context of a sensitivity analysis.