|
|
Next Article 
Blood, Vol. 93 No. 5 (March 1), 1999:
pp. 1441-1442
EDITORIAL
Evolution in BLOOD
 |
EDITORIAL |
THE IMPORTANCE of prompt, reliable, and
insightful communication in basic scientific investigation and clinical
medicine should not be underestimated. Rarely do completely novel ideas and concepts arise; rather, most of the advances made in the basic and
clinical sciences come from the logical pursuit of hypotheses grown
from the collected work of scientific communities. The cornerstone of
this cross-fertilization of ideas, data, methods, and experimental strategies is the biomedical journal. In order to fulfill this role,
periodicals must be flexible, adapting to the needs of the communities
they serve. As such, the readers of BLOOD will witness several
changes in the following year.
The speed with which scientific and clinical data are disseminated is
key to their timely use by others. In the past, most journals,
including BLOOD, created a special category of publication, which in our journal is termed a Rapid Communication. These
papers contain material deemed by the authors and our editors to
require immediate publication. For many journals, including
BLOOD, publication of Rapid Communications was
significantly faster than that of the other papers appearing in the
Journal. However, this is no longer the case for BLOOD. The
average time from submission to publication for papers designated as a
Rapid Communication is presently only 1 week quicker than for
manuscripts submitted as Regular Papers. This is due, in large
measure, to our accelerated schedule of publishing all accepted papers.
Moreover, the perception that Rapid Communications must be
processed more rapidly has, on occasion, led to a less than ideal
review process. For these reasons, starting in volume 94 (July 1, 1999), BLOOD will no longer differentiate between Rapid
and Regular papers, knowing that we will not compromise in
providing our readers with the timely publication of important
scientific and clinical information.
The term Rapid also evolved to encompass the notion that such
papers were of exceptional scientific importance. Many papers published
in BLOOD provide important new paradigms, illuminate fundamental aspects of cell biology or clinical medicine, or are absolutely definitive in a highly focused area of clinical or basic
science. In years past, many of these exceptional papers were published
as Rapid Communications, but an equal number were not so
designated. As we abandon our Rapid Communications category, the Editors have elected to call greater attention to the papers that
fulfill these criteria by expanding upon the Focus on
Hematology segment begun last year to include papers the Editors
believe are of special importance for the broader readership of the
Journal. Such "Plenary Papers" will appear in every issue
of the Journal, occasionally accompanied by an editorial designed to
provide an expanded background for the work and to highlight the
importance of the paper for the readership not intimately involved in
that area of clinical or scientific endeavor. Authors submitting
manuscripts to the Journal are invited to recommend that their papers
be considered for such designation if they believe their work is of
broad interest to the readership, provides a novel insight into basic
or clinical sciences, or definitively answers an important question
occupying the attention of practitioners or investigators of
Hematology. A brief cover letter calling attention to the
characteristics making the paper of outstanding significance should
accompany the submission.
In keeping with other needs of our readers, the Editors are taking
measures to relieve the arm strain caused by the sheer weight of a
typical issue of BLOOD! There are several ways we will do this.
One is by introducing a word limit on submissions. Although draconian
measures are not yet called for, we believe that all of the scientific
principles and data necessary to convince the readership of a clinical
or scientific advance with very few exceptions can be encompassed in
5,500 words, and with an abstract containing 250 words or less. As
such, we now request a computer generated text word count and abstract
word count to accompany each manuscript submission. Moreover, the size
of figures that present data should be carefully considered by
potential authors; attention to such details will not sacrifice
important scientific points and will make a paper that is easier to
read and a journal that is easier to carry. We encourage authors
considering submission to the Journal to carefully read the new
Instructions to Authors in this and subsequent issues of
BLOOD.
Additional changes starting with volume 94 will be found in the
Correspondence section. For many years this segment of the Journal has been composed primarily of letters to the editor, mixed
with short experimental results or interesting patient presentations. As more of these short scientific presentations are cited in the medical literature, the Editors believe it is prudent that they, like
all of the other papers in BLOOD, are subject to appropriate peer-review. Such "Brief Reports" will have an absolute
limit of two pages, containing at most 1,000 words and one figure and one table. In contrast, letters to the editor have always been screened
but are not peer-reviewed, and thus will be separated from the
peer-reviewed section of BLOOD. The Editors remain committed to
provide a forum for commentary on papers published in the Journal.
One of the foundations of providing the readers of BLOOD with
the very best papers in the field are the outstanding efforts of our
reviewers. The Editors would like to take this opportunity to thank the
members of our Editorial Board, and the near 1,800 individuals who took
time from their busy schedules to review the 3,000 manuscripts
submitted to BLOOD in 1998. We would especially like to thank
the 21 scientists and clinicians who reviewed 10 or more papers for the
Journal in 1998; these members of our "Reviewer Honor Roll" will
soon learn of their distinction, as will their Department Chairs. But
with these thanks come a plea. The number of manuscripts submitted to
BLOOD continues to rise. Only the willingness of members of our
clinical and scientific communities to accept papers for review, and
their timely completion of the task, will allow our Journal to
communicate the very best that investigative hematology has to offer.
Finally, in the coming year we hope to continue to fulfill our goal
of providing the Hematology and other scientific communities with
up-to-date, concise primary data and timely reviews. By all measures, BLOOD is a successful journal. The 1997 Citation
Index for the Journal was 9.5, ranking BLOOD amongst the top
biomedical journals available. Many of our papers were cited in
excess of 100 times in the past 2 years, indicating our continued
commitment to publishing papers that set standards in Clinical and
Experimental Hematology, Cell and Molecular Biology, Tumor Immunology,
and Biochemistry. With the continued efforts of the Associate Editors, our Editorial Board and reviewers, and the staff of the Central Editorial Office, we hope to continue to provide the readers of BLOOD with cutting edge advances in clinical medicine and the scientific basis for advancing our field.
[View Larger Version of this Image (165K GIF file)]
Kenneth Kaushansky, MD
Seattle, WA
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
|
|
