PII: S0953-6205(09)00006-5

Abstract

As a newcomer to the European Journal of Internal Medicine (EJIM), but with some recent experience as Editor-in-Chief of another major scientific journal, I am cognizant that the visibility and prestige of a journal depend much on its impact factor (IF). Much criticized as a method to rank scientists, there is little doubt that the IF is the best measure of the importance of a scientific journal, originally developed and established to help librarians to subscribe those that are more relevant for their customers. I predict that the attainment by EJIM of a 2008 IF in June 2009, even if relatively modest as it may be to start with, will mark a milestone towards the full establishment of the official journal of the European Federation of Internal Medicine (EFIM) in the competitive arena of the journals featuring this discipline. I realize that it will be initially unrealistic for the EJIM to be truly competitive with giants like The Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, BMJ and JAMA (to mention only a few). There are, however, many good manuscripts that do not find space in these highly selective journals. Hence my goal and strategy and, I am sure, those of the Associate and Section Editors, are to promote and welcome (but not uncritically!) better and better articles that would not find space in the forementioned more selective journals. Obviously, we are ambitious, so that our ultimate goal is to increase through this strategy the IF of the EJIM to the extent of making it progressively more established, reputable and ultimately more selective. The Editors will have an open and welcome eye towards manuscripts coming from internists from EFIM member countries, but only to the extent that this special attention does not impinge upon the quality of published articles, and hence upon the progress of EJIM toward becoming a leader in the arena of internal medicine journals. Which actions do we intend to implement to increase the visibility and scientific credibility of the EJIM in front of the international community of internists? I believe that we should develop honest but active strategies to further increase the number of citations to EJIM. For instance, we plan to feature Commentaries as a new content item, written by distinguished experts on the best accepted articles (often by the reviewers themselves). These commentaries are meant to emphasize special aspects of the articles, to point out how they manage to expand the scientific field but also to mention the limits of such articles and of their findings. Moreover, we envisage the possibility of organizing two-voice Debates on controversial topics in the various fields of Internal Medicine, with in turn the advantage of stimulating external Correspondence on the actual debate topics. Another idea that we plan to develop is to feature a new section called Talking About, providing our readership with short pieces of information on an array of events that may be of general interest. Examples are the actual licensing of new innovative drugs or diagnostic methods, new initiatives of health agencies, profiles of distinguished medical leaders, obituaries and other miscellaneous news from the world of clinical science and internal medicine that may be of interest for the European internist. Barring these novelties, the new Editor-in-Chief and the old and new Associate and Section Editors do not intend to change substantially the line and format of the EJIM, which were so successfully developed by the former Editor-in-Chief Peter de Leeuw. Submitted manuscripts will be assigned to Section or Associate Editors and will undergo peer review, to be eventually allotted for publication or rejection. Some manuscripts, that are obviously and clearly unsuitable for further consideration, will be returned to the authors without peer review, with a brief explanation of the reasons for the negative decision. We have problems of space and a significant backlog of manuscripts. I am afraid that the current rate of rejection of approximately 60 to 70% is inevitable, and that we shall be obliged to reject many sound manuscripts. We believe that there will be little space (if any) for Case Reports, even though we realize that they may be of special interest for our younger constituency. EFIM will find in the future a way to collect and keep on record the most interesting case reports, perhaps in an electronic depository. In all, it is with great enthusiasm that I start my term of office as Editor-in-Chief of the EJIM. To this end, I rely not only upon the enthusiastic collaboration of the team of Associated and Specialty Editors but, most importantly, on the whole EFIM constituency, that I am sure is keen to see a continued growth of the official journal of the Federation.