-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Has it Really Been Five Years Already?, Endocrinology, Volume 143, Issue 12, 1 December 2002, Pages 4495–i–4495–ii, https://doi.org/10.1210/endo.143.12.9995
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
Five years ago, we took over Endocrinology from Shlomo Melmed and his staff. It has been our desire and intention to maintain consistency in the journal’s quality and status established by our predecessors. With an increase in the citation index and the maintenance of rapidness in review and time to decision as well as time to publishing, we feel we have been able to continue the tradition of publishing quality research in Endocrinology. The success for these accomplishments and improvements such as the Minireviews, Special Topics Issues, and Research Perspectives has been due to the hard work and conscientiousness of the editors, editorial board members, and the journal office staff. Their continued dedication to the journal has provided the basis for the operational success. From the start, my goal for our tenure at Endocrinology was to provide fair, objective, and timely review of submitted papers. Many of you reading this may agree that we accomplished these goals; although you may not have always agreed with our decisions, you accepted that our tasks were performed with fairness and objectivity. Some, on the other hand, have had a different view, complaining about unfair reviews or unreasonable requests from referees involving an editor’s decision on a particular manuscript. In these cases, the editor’s intentions were simply to provide the best possible objective review for the highest quality of research. These rejections are never easy decisions for the editors or reviewers, as we are also authors who submit papers; we realize the process is not perfect, but we try and manage it as best we can. Through these years, the journal has attempted to maintain consistency of the review process, and I believe we are just as intent on accomplishing that today, at the end of our five years, as we were at the beginning. I think that, in comparing submission of papers to other high-quality journals, one will find that the management of submissions and the helpful interaction of the office staff with authors has been exceptional, since in many cases this was the authors’ first line of contact with the journal. On numerous occasions, authors’ papers that were found to be of low priority for publication have been improved to publishable quality by the help of both the editors and office staff.
