The peer review process from an editor's point of view

Analysis of the interval between submission and publication in genetics journals

One of the main factors that attracts authors to choose a journal is the time interval between submission and publication, which varies between journals and subject matter. Here, we evaluated the time intervals between submission and publication according to journal impact factor and continent of author's affiliation, considering articles with authors from single or multiple continents. Altogether, 72 journals indexed in the Web of Science database within the subject matter "Genetics and Heredity", divided by impact factor into four quartiles and randomly selected were analyzed for time intervals from article submission to publication. Data from a total of 46,349 articles published from 2016 to 2020 were collected and analyzed considering the following time intervals: submission to acceptance (SA), acceptance to publication (AP) and submission to publication (SP). The median of the quartiles for the SP interval was 166 (IQR [118-225]) days for Q1, 147 (IQR [103-206]) days for Q2, 161 (IQR [116-226]) days for Q3 and 137 (IQR [69-264]) days for Q4, showing a significant difference among quartiles (p < 0.001). In Q4, median interval of time was shorter in interval SA but longer in interval AP, and overall, articles in Q4 had the shortest interval of time in SP. A potential association of the median time interval and authors' continent was analysed and no significant difference was observed between articles with authors from single versus multiple continents or between continents in articles with authors from only one continent. However, in journals from Q4, time from submission to publication was longer for articles with authors from North America and Europe than from other continents, although the difference was not significant. Finally, articles of authors from the African continent had the smallest representation in journals from Q1-Q3 and articles from Oceania were underrepresented in group Q4. The study provides a global analysis of the total time required for submission, acceptance and publication in journals in the field of genetics and heredity. Our results may contribute in the development of strategies to expedite the process of scientific publishing in the field, and to promote equity in knowledge production and dissemination for researchers from all continents.

Publication Times and Impact Factors (IFs) in Dentistry Journals

INTRODUCTION

 The speed of manuscript publication in reputable journals plays a crucial role in spreading scientific novelties and may influence the number of received citations. In the present study, the authors investigated the publication speed of dentistry journals. This is crucial for both authors, who desire rapid dissemination of their findings, and patients in need, who seek new therapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 This was a cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of published dentistry journals. A list of dentistry journals featured in the 2021 Journal Citation Report was downloaded. A total of five random original articles were extracted from each of these journals. These articles were published between January and December 2020. Median and interquartile range (IQR) times from submission to acceptance, publication in print, online publication, time from acceptance to in print and online publication were calculated. The correlation between publication times and journal impact factor (IF) was examined.

RESULTS

 A total of 89 journals were included. Individual time from submission to acceptance (peer review time) ranged from 6 to 279 days, the combined median peer review time was 115 (80-159) days. The overall median time from acceptance to online or print publication was 17 (12-38) and 153 (92-249) days, respectively. Journals with available data concerning publication times tended to have higher IF than others. Only journals that did not have available time from acceptance to online publication had higher IF. There were negative correlations between times from submission (r = -0.442, p = 0.007), acceptance (r = -0.616, p < 0.001) to in-print publication, and IF. There were no correlations between IF and time from submission to acceptance, acceptance to online publication, and submission to online publication.

CONCLUSIONS

 Publication times availability was revealed to be an indicator of higher impacted journals, which is a potential new exponent of journal quality. Higher IF values were associated with shorter times from submission to acceptance and in-print publication, which is consistent with current editorial policies.

Time from submission to publication varied widely for biomedical journals: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Fast dissemination of research is important for improving treatments and thus benefitting patients, caregivers, and researchers. However, getting scientific papers published may take a long time. The editorial handling time can be delayed by several processes both before and after acceptance of the paper. The aim of this study was to systematically review the editorial handling time of biomedical peer-reviewed literature (i.e. time from submission to publication).

METHODS

The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020196238). PubMed and EMBASE were searched systematically on 29 May 2020. We included publications on the timespan between submission and publication for accepted articles published in biomedical journals.

RESULTS

Of the 4197 unique studies identified in the search, 69 were included in the systematic review. The mean timespan from submission to publication varied from 91 to 639 days, while the median timespan varied from 70 to 558 days. Submission to acceptance and acceptance to publication timespans showed similar disparity with means ranging from 50 to 276 and 11 to 362 days, respectively. Data were too statistically heterogeneous to perform meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Editorial handling times of journals varied widely from a few months to almost two years, which delays the availability of new evidence. The editorial handling time did not differ between submission-to-acceptance-time and acceptance-to-publication-time. Examining differences in editorial processes between journals with long and short editorial handling times may help uncover, which processes are frequent causes of delay and thereby where to improve.

Factors Affecting the Time to Publication in Ophthalmology Journals: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis

Purpose: There are currently no available aids for authors when selecting ophthalmology journals to submit their manuscripts. We aim to provide comprehensive data on the duration from submission to various stages of the publication process and assess factors influencing time to publication in ophthalmology journals.Methods: A list of ophthalmology journals was obtained from the 2019 Web of Science Journal Citation Report. Journal characteristics, such as five-year impact factor, number of authors per article, journal type, and number of multi-institutional articles, were collected. The dates of submission, acceptance, electronic and print publication for all articles published in an ophthalmology journal in 2019 were determined.Results: In total, 56 journals and 8835 research articles were included. Of these articles, 3591 (40.6%) were open access and 4837 (54.7%) were multi-institutional. In 2019, most publications came from the United States of America (n = 1973), China (n = 1069) and Germany (n = 602). Significant associations were found between various predictors and a reduced mean number of days from submission to electronic publication: increased journal five-year impact factor (p = .026), more authors (p = .028), publishing in a hybrid journal (both open-access and subscription articles) versus an open-access journal (p = .021), and a reduced proportion of multi-institutional articles in a journal (p = .030).Conclusions: There is a wide variation in the time to acceptance and publication in ophthalmology journals. Authors can expect a shorter time to publication when publishing in high-impact journals.

Reviewing the review process: Identifying sources of delay

BACKGROUND

The process of manuscript review is a central part of scientific publishing, but has increasingly become the subject of criticism, particularly for being difficult to manage, slow, and time consuming - all of which contribute to delaying publication.

AIMS

To identify potential sources of delays during manuscript review by examining the review process, and to identify and propose constructive strategies to reduce time spent on the review process without sacrificing journal quality.

METHOD

Sixty-seven manuscripts published in the Australasian Medical Journal (AMJ) were evaluated in terms of duration of peer review, number of times manuscripts were returned to authors, time authors spent on revision per review round, manuscripts containing grammatical errors reviewers deemed as major, papers where instructions to authors were not adhered to, and the number of reviews not submitted on time.

RESULTS

The median duration of the review process was found to be 74 days, and papers were on average returned to authors 1.73 times for revision. In 35.8% of papers, instructions to authors were not adhered to, whilst 29.8% of papers contained major grammatical errors. In 70.1% of papers reviewers did not submit their reviews on time, whilst the median time spent on revision by authors per review round was found to be 22 days.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the importance of communication before and during review. Reviewers should be thoroughly briefed on their role and what is expected of them, whilst the review process as well as the author's role in preventing delays should be explained to contributors upon submission.