Shape Memory and Superelasticity Editorial Board Member Receives ASM Silver Medal

Developing a Society Journal Utilizing the Triad Framework

Editorial boards can be of tremendous help to a busy editor of a hospital-based newsletter or magazine. This article shows you how to develop the role of the editorial board member, make certain all members know and can achieve the editor's expectations, and chair a board that shares with you a commitment to excellence in publishing. These strategies apply to other in-house publications, such as school of nursing and association newsletters as well.

Looking back at the past and seeking for greater development: in commemoration of the 120th anniversary of the Chinese Medical Journal

Editorial: Twenty‐Five Years Later…

Evolution and transformation of JVS-CIT

IntroductionEach journal’s editorial and advisory board plays a critical role in resolving gender bias in the peer-review and publication process. Thus, this study aimed to quantify women’s participation in editorial and advisory boards of major dental journals. Gender data on editorial and advisory boards were extracted from major dental journals, which were then categorized by journal specialty focus. The gender of the editor-in-chief and associate editor-in-chief was noted to assess the effect of journal leadership on women’s participation in journal boards. For comparison purposes, data were also obtained regarding the percentage of women faculty for each dental specialty.ResultsOverall, in the major 69 dental journals, 14.8% of editorial board members were women. An one-way ANOVA analysis revealed statistically significant gender differences between journal specialty categories (p = 0.003) with some dental specialties’ journals demonstrating a relatively high participation of women as editorial board members. There was a significant positive correlation for various dental specialties between women’s representation in editorial and advisory boards and women in similar dental academic specialties (p = 0.02, r2 = 0.55). Furthermore, there was a positive correlation between the presence of women in journal editorial leadership and the percentage of women serving as advisory board members (p = 0.03). Our results confirmed that the under-representation of women on dental journal editorial boards was significantly different between dental science specialties. When there were more women in journal editorial leadership positions, there was a higher participation of women as editorial and advisory board members. Journals should increase the numbers of women on editorial boards in order to secure diversity, improve publication quality and recognize women’s contribution to dental science.

Don't Hold Your Breath—The Rise of Women on Journal Editorial Boards

The history of IUBMB Life (1980-2020).

Diversity and inclusion at the <scp>ISJ</scp>

The Journal of Vascular Surgery: 1982 to 1990

Connected Community

A New Era

The editorial process of a scientific journal involves highly specialized skills and hard work of many con­ tributors, including editors and reviewers. These tasks require not only the intellectual competence of each but also hours of administrative work, evaluating manuscripts and maintaining the flow of publications in progress. The flow of the peer review process in ABO initiates through the editorial office to ensure that ma­ nuscripts have fulfilled all technical conditions before being sent for editorial review. It is up to the office to ensure that the limits of text and figures have been complied with in accordance with the different types of articles accepted, and confirm that the forms of potential conflicts of interest, authors’ participation and appro­ val by research ethics committees are adequate. Once these assumptions have been met, the manuscripts are forwarded to the chief editor who initially evaluates the manuscript to ensure that the text conforms to the scope of the journal, and suggests to the associate editor the strengths, weaknesses and the scientific questions that can be considered during peer review. The associate editor is responsible for overseeing the manuscript until its final decision, whether to be published or rejected. To make this decision, the associate editors rely on help from reviewers, who anonymously evaluate manuscripts, making suggestions as to con­ tent and form, with the goal of improving the final work. Reviewers are divided into members of the editorial board, listed by name in all publications and on the website of the ABO, and reviewers “ad hoc” that are cited in an annual thanks note published in the journal. After a few rounds of evaluation between authors and re­ viewers, under the coordination of associate editors, each accepted manuscript is forwarded to the technical teams of editors, layout and printing. Next year will begin the renovation of the national and international members of the ABO editorial board and, as recognition, many reviewers “ad hoc” will be listed in the editorial board of the journal. The goal is to keep as a member of the editorial board only persons who have helped to accelerate the peer review process with quality and timely revisions. The flow of peer review is managed in different ways in different scientific journals. From a physical process, mailing hard copied articles or the use of simplified electronic processes as electronic messaging or the use of automated systems with internet­based interfaces. The ABO, like all other scientific journals, has gone through all these stages over the past 15 years. Two years ago we started using the SciELO submissions system and have more than 360 manuscripts evaluated using this interface, from which about 50% have already been published. This system was created by SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online) and is an initiative that has the support of FAPESP (Foundation for Research Support of the State of Sao Paulo), BIREME (Regional Library of Medicine) and CNPq (National Council of Scientific and Technological Development). This interface utilizes a system based on an open­code software called Open Systems Journal, developed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP). Although the platform has been built with options for several languages, the increase of its use has generated some difficulties for authors, especially international ones. With the advancement of global exposure of ABO, many authors who do not master the Portuguese lan­ guage have considered our journal for their publications. Over the past 24 months, among the manuscripts sent for review, about 45% were not in English and 15% not included Brazilian authors. This fact opens the door for the Brazilian ophthalmology to be internationally recognized and increases our responsibility. Maintaining its continuous support to Brazilian and Latin American scientific journals, SciELO decided to start a partnership with Thomson Reuters for the use of ScholarOne system of peer review. ABO was invited by SciELO recently, and we are one of the first journals to be part of this partnership. The possibility of being part of ScholarOne offers to authors the opportunity to use a submission system already known and used by renowned journals such as IOVS or the British Journal of Ophthalmology. We believe that this feature will further increase the exposure of, and demand for ABO worldwide.

Our Advisors, Our Ambassadors, Our Editorial Board Members

Taking stock: Editor-in-Chief Theresa Kueckmann reflects on the year 2017 and lays out plans for the new year.