- Email: [email protected]
Experience with expedited reviews
Journal of Cardiac Failure Vol. 6 No. 1 2000
Editorial Experience With Expedited Reviews In June of 1998, we announced a policy of expedited reviews for manuscripts that had been reviewed but rejected by other prestigious journals. We encouraged the submission of the manuscript with the previous reviews and with a detailed response to reviewer criticisms. Our goal was to reduce the burden placed on over-committed reviewers by the effective use of previous reviews. This policy was instituted with the hope that an editor assessment of the need for further external review with a shorter review time and quicker publication would be possible for quality submissions. The policy has proved rewarding for both the authors and the Journal. Some manuscripts have been accepted after minor revisions that were recommended by the editors without further outside review. Some have only required 1 outside review rather than the customary 2 or 3. On average, manuscripts submitted by this procedure have fared better (higher acceptance rate) with a shorter review time and a quicker publication than manuscripts going through the standard submission process. We therefore view this trial period of expedited reviews as a success. We shall make this method a permanent option for manuscript submission, and we encourage authors whose manuscripts have not survived the low acceptance rate at some of our more general cardiological sister publications to turn to the Journal of Cardiac Failure with full disclosure of the prior reviews and the editorial decision. Hopefully this procedure will assure the prompt publication of important articles without over using our most precious resource--the time of our valued reviewers. Jay N. Cohn, MD Editor-in-Chief Minneapolis, Minnesota
Copyright 9 2000 by Churchill Livhtgstone|
Editorial Experience With Expedited Reviews In June of 1998, we announced a policy of expedited reviews for manuscripts that had been reviewed but rejected by other prestigious journals. We encouraged the submission of the manuscript with the previous reviews and with a detailed response to reviewer criticisms. Our goal was to reduce the burden placed on over-committed reviewers by the effective use of previous reviews. This policy was instituted with the hope that an editor assessment of the need for further external review with a shorter review time and quicker publication would be possible for quality submissions. The policy has proved rewarding for both the authors and the Journal. Some manuscripts have been accepted after minor revisions that were recommended by the editors without further outside review. Some have only required 1 outside review rather than the customary 2 or 3. On average, manuscripts submitted by this procedure have fared better (higher acceptance rate) with a shorter review time and a quicker publication than manuscripts going through the standard submission process. We therefore view this trial period of expedited reviews as a success. We shall make this method a permanent option for manuscript submission, and we encourage authors whose manuscripts have not survived the low acceptance rate at some of our more general cardiological sister publications to turn to the Journal of Cardiac Failure with full disclosure of the prior reviews and the editorial decision. Hopefully this procedure will assure the prompt publication of important articles without over using our most precious resource--the time of our valued reviewers. Jay N. Cohn, MD Editor-in-Chief Minneapolis, Minnesota
Copyright 9 2000 by Churchill Livhtgstone|