Indian Journal Of Pharmacology Research Articles

Dermatology journals from India: A critical appraisal of the journal metrics.

Background Bibliometrics refer to documents and citation-based measures that measure different aspects of performance of a journal, including impact, output and prestige. Objective The aim of this study was to collect bibliometric data of various Indian dermatology journals as well as Indian journals from other disciplines, in order to compare relative performances. Methods Journal metrics pertaining to various Indian journals, both from dermatology [Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL), Indian Journal of Dermatology (IJD), Indian Dermatology Online Journal, Indian Journal of Pediatric Dermatology and International Journal of Trichology] and other disciplines [Indian Journal of Medical Research (IJMR), Indian Journal of Pediatrics (IJP), Indian Journal of Ophthalmology and Indian Journal of Pharmacology] were sought. Data pertaining to the following 8 metrics during the year 2021 was collected: Journal Impact factor, SCImago Journal Rank, h5-index, Eigenfactor score and normalized Eigenfactor Score, Journal Citation Indicator, Scimago Journal and Country Rank H-index, CiteScore and Source Normalized Impact per Paper. Results Among Indian dermatology journals, for the year 2021, IJDVL had the highest impact factor (2.217) and h-index (48). IJD led in terms of prestige metrics such as SCImago Journal Rank (0.403), Eigenfactor score (0.00231) and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (1.132). IJDVL underperformed with respect to an average dermatology journal on all three prestige metrics. Among selected journals from other disciplines, two (IJMR and IJP) had impact factor exceeding five, despite lagging behind IJDVL two years ago. Most had normalized scores exceeding 1, indicating better performance than an average journal from their respective fields. Limitations Non-inclusion of altmetrics related data Conclusion IJDVL is one of the leading Indian journals in the field of dermatology, followed closely by IJD. A rise in IJDVL influence is evident over the past decade, as evident by various metrics. However, the progress still trails behind the average of global dermatology journals as evident by the field-normalized journal metrics, indicating potential for further growth of journal influence.

The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study.

Background:Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest levels of evidence, they might not necessarily be of good quality. Hence, RCTs should always be appraised critically. Critical appraisal is the corroboration of evidence by methodically studying its validity, reliability, and applicability.Objective:The primary objective of this study was to do a critical appraisal of the RCTs published in Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) from 2011 to 2016. The secondary objective was to scrutinize how adequately the published RCTs adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) declaration.Materials and Methods:The present study included all RCTs published as full-text articles in IJP from January 2011 to December 2016. The identified RCTs were critically appraised using the critical appraisal checklist based on CONSORT 2010 guidelines and its extensions.Results:According to this analysis, 75% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56–0.87) of the articles had given details about the sample size calculation. Nearly 89.29% (95% CI: 0.72–0.96) of the articles described the method for generating random allocation sequence, but only 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the articles described allocation concealment method. Almost 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the trials reported results as per the principle of the intention to treat (ITT). Nearly 21.43% (95% CI: 0.10–0.39) of the studies reported CIs in the present study.Conclusion:Allocation concealment method, analysis of the data based on the ITT principle, and reporting CIs were found to be underreported in this study. There should be more emphasis on reporting of allocation concealment, ITT analysis, and CI.

Comparison of Adherence to ARRIVE Guidelines in Animal Research Articles Published in the Years 2009 and 2016 in Pharmacology Journals: An Observational Study

Objective: To evaluate and compare the adherence of the ARRIVE guidelines before and after its introduction by the articles published by two leading journals publishing animal research articles. Materials and Methods: Literature of original research articles of animal studies was obtained from two leading open-access journals. A combined total of 100 articles were selected from these journals from the years 2009 and 2016 (50 articles from each year). Each article was assessed by two investigators independently. The percentage of articles adhering to each item in the ARRIVE guidelines was calculated for both 2009 and 2016. The percentage of overall adherence of the articles to all recommendations was calculated. Completeness of reporting of an article was also assessed. The percentage of overall adherence of the articles to all recommendations was calculated. The adherence to the ARRIVE guidelines in the two journals was statistically compared using Chi-square test. P = 0.05 was considered as a measure of statistical significance. Results: A combined total of 100 articles from the two journals, Indian Journal of Pharmacology and Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, during the years 2009 and 2016 (50 articles from each year) were studied for adherence to ARRIVE and completeness of studies. Despite introduction of the ARRIVE guidelines, 8 of 38 unreported items in articles of 2009 are still unreported in 2016. A statistically insignificant improvement was observed in total adherence to 22 of 38 recommendations of the ARRIVE checklist by >50% of the articles in 2016. A statistically significant improvement was observed in completeness of reporting on 14/38 recommendations, 6 years after the introduction of the ARRIVE guidelines. The study revealed that ~58% of recommendations of the ARRIVE guidelines are being followed by the articles selected from 2016. Conclusion: No significant improvement in quality of reporting of animal research published by two reputed journals was observed even 6 years after the introduction of the ARRIVE guidelines. However, the study revealed improvement in the completeness of reporting of an animal research article. Active endorsement of the ARRIVE guidelines by editors of journals publishing animal research is recommended.

Evaluation of reporting of CONSORT flow diagrams in randomized controlled trials in a national and international pharmacology journal.

Objective:To evaluate and compare the reporting of consolidated standard of reporting trial (CONSORT) flow diagrams in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in a national and international pharmacology journal.Methods:RCTs in an international pharmacology journal, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (EJCP), and a national journal, Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP), published from January 2014 to July 2016 were evaluated for reporting and completeness of CONSORT flow diagrams. A total of 138 articles (EJCP = 90; IJP = 48) were analyzed and compared.Results:Of 138 RCTs analyzed, 90 were from EJCP and 48 were from IJP. 76.6% (69/90) articles from EJCP and 37.5% (18/48) articles from IJP had reported the CONSORT flow diagram. Of these, 95.5% (66/69) had assessed for eligibility in EJCP and 88.8% (16/18) had reported the same in IJP. The number of participants excluded was reported in 86.9% (60/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 83.3% (15/18) in IJP. 82.6% (57/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 77.7% (14/18) in IJP had mentioned the details of randomization. Allocation of intervention was reported in 91.3% (63/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 88.8% (16/18) in IJP. 60.8% (42/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 44.4% (08/18) in IJP had mentioned the details of follow-up of participants. 95.5% (66/69) flow diagrams in EJCP and 94.4% (17/18) in IJP had mentioned details about analysis.Conclusion:In spite of both the journals, IJP and EJCP endorsing the CONSORT statement, a significant difference in the reporting of CONSORT flow diagrams in RCTs can be noted. The quality of reporting can be improved by stringent publication guidelines by the editors.

A study to assess the methodological quality of in vivo animal experiments published in Indian journal of pharmacology: A retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study.

BACKGROUND:Good reporting of experimental research is a vital part of research process. Although the reporting guidelines such as Animal research: Reporting in vivo experiments (ARRIVE) require the authors to stick to a standard format, they do not guarantee study reports' validity. For assessing the study reports validity, critical appraisal tools are required.OBJECTIVE:The evaluation of the methodological quality of in vivo animal studies of Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) published between 2011 and 2017 through critical appraisal was the primary objective. The secondary objective was to evaluate the adherence of selected studies to the ARRIVE guidelines.MATERIALS AND METHODS:All in vivo animal studies published as full-text articles in IJP from January 2011 to December 2017 and satisfying the inclusion norms were included. A checklist based on the underlying principles of ARRIVE statement was applied to in vivo animal research (AR) published in IJP. For critical appraisal of reports, risk-of-bias domains were also applied on studies from in vivo AR.RESULTS:One hundred and sixty-one studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Seventy-three articles (45.34%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37–0.53) discussed about randomization procedure. Eighteen articles (11.18%, 95% CI: 0.07–0.16) gave details about blinding when assessing results. None of the studies provided details of sample size calculation. Eight articles (4.97%, 95% CI: 0.02–0.09) commented on the study limitations.CONCLUSION:It was found that adherence to only some criteria of ARRIVE guidelines was subpar. There is a need for optimal reporting of random distribution of animals to experimental groups, concealment of allocation, blinded outcome evaluation, computation of sample size, and attrition of animals for improving the validity of AR.

The assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials published in Indian medical journals.

Aim:In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we sought to evaluate if the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in the year 2017 among the Indian medical journals (IMJs) complied with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines and identify domains where reporting could be improved.Methods:A literature search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar to identify all the IMJs that published RCTs in the year 2017. In the archives of the identified journals, the number of published RCTs was identified and the full text was obtained. We selected articles that stated RCT in abstract and title and that evaluated the safety and efficacy of all therapeutic and preventive interventions.Results:A total of seven IMJs comprising of the Indian Journal of Anesthesia, Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology, Indian Journal of Pharmacology, Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics, and Indian Journal of Medical and Pediatric Oncology that published a total of 84 RCTs were included. The mean compliance score of all the RCTs was 13.7 ± 2.66 (57%). Most RCTs had serious reporting deficiencies in the methodology and result sections.Discussion:In spite of journals making it mandatory for prospective authors to comply with the CONSORT guidelines, it is intriguing that there continues to be significant lacunae in reporting RCTs adequately in most IMJs.Conclusion:There is an urgent need to impart training to the medical community of our country in clinical research methods and reporting of RCTs.

A comparative analysis of quality of reporting statistics in two Indian journals

Purpose: The importance of statistical analysis in medical research papers is ever increasing, hence, evaluation of statistical validity is crucial when evidence based medicine is highly valued. Studies with poor methodological quality and poor statistics cannot prove or disprove study hypothesis with certainty. This study was designed to evaluate, analyze and compare the reporting of statistical methods and errors in articles published in Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) and Journal of Association of Physicians of India (JAPI). Materials and Methods: All original articles published in IJP and JAPI from January 2009 to September 2014 were reviewed and evaluated by using a checklist which included type of statistical test, common errors, etc. The statistical software used for analysis of data in these articles were also reviewed. Results: Three hundred articles (IJP=154; JAPI=146) were reviewed. The most commonly used statistical test in IJP was one-way ANOVA (53.8%) as compared to Chi-square test (50.6%) in JAPI. The statistical software used for analysis was mentioned in 43.5% and 50.7% articles published in IJP and JAPI respectively. The most commonly used software was GraphPad Prism (66.4%) in IJP and SPSS (67%) in JAPI. Statistical errors as per the checklist were more common in JAPI (63.5%) as against 49% in IJP. Use of mean+SE instead of Mean+SD was the most common statistical error in IJP (51.9%) whereas failure to mention the type of 't' test was the most common error (38%) in JAPI. Conclusion: Statistical errors are common in IJP as well as JAPI. To elevate the quality of articles published in Indian journals, every article must be sent for statistical review.

Adherence to ARRIVE guidelines in animal research articles published in a National and International Pharmacology Journal

Background: This study compares the adherence to Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines in an Indian (IJP: Indian Journal of Pharmacology) and International journal (JPET: Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics).Methods: All original animal studies published in IJP and JPET between January 2014 and September 2015 were downloaded manually and 100 articles were randomly chosen from each journal and analyzed using the ARRIVE guidelines checklist and checked for adherence.Results: Most articles indicated the ethical statement (IJP- 96%, JPET- 98%). Steps taken to minimize effects of subjective bias in the study design were not mentioned in more than half the articles (IJP-50%, JPET-37%). Details of experimental animals were not adequately reported (IJP- 79%, JPET-68%). Details of animal housing (IJP-20%, JPET-39%) and husbandry (IJP-59%, JPET-51%) were poorly reported. Explanation of sample size calculation was mentioned in 2% and 1% articles in IJP and JPET. Statistical methods were well explained, yet the methods used to assess whether the data met the assumptions of the statistical approach was poorly reported.Conclusions: The present study demonstrates relatively suboptimal reporting standards in animal studies published in IJP and JPET. Adherence to ARRIVE guidelines can be improved.

Pre-enrolment screening reporting in randomized controlled trials from five pharmacology journals

<p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Background:</span></strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) when appropriately conducted and reported represent the gold standard in evidence based medicine. Various guidelines including <span lang="EN-US">the consolidated standards of reporting trials (</span>CONSORT 2010) recommend the reporting of the number of participants screened for potential recruitment. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting of pre-enrolment screening figure in randomized controlled trials from five pharmacology journals.</p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Methods:</span></strong>RCTs from the five pharmacology journals with descending order of impact factor i.e. The journal of clinical pharmacology (JCP), British journal of clinical pharmacology (BJCP), European journal of clinical pharmacology (EJCP), Journal of pharmacology and pharmacotherapeutics (JPP) and Indian journal of pharmacology (IJP) published between January 2013 to December 2014 were reviewed using standardized criteria.</p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Results:</span></strong>37 out of 174 (21.27%) did not report the number of participants screened prior to recruitment. From the 137 RCTs that reported this screening figure, 95,494 (46.30%, range: 41-60.60%) of the screened participants (2, 06,243) were subsequently enrolled. About 52.49% of those screened and not enrolled, did not meet inclusion criteria or met exclusion criteria and about 11.89% declined to participate in an RCT. </p><p class="abstract"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Conclusions:</span></strong><span lang="EN-US"> Thus, there was about 80% reporting of pre-enrolment screening figure in RCTs from five pharmacology journals which need further improvement. The practice of documenting pre-enrolment screening figure and associated exclusion reasons will help to plan appropriate recruitment strategies during protocol development.</span></p>

Assessment of adherence to the statistical components of consolidated standards of reporting trials statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trials from five pharmacology journals.

Background:The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a device to standardize reporting and improve the quality of controlled trials. However, little attention is paid to the statistical components in the CONSORT checklist. The present study evaluates the randomized controlled trials [RCTs] published in five high impact pharmacology journals with respect to its statistical methods.Methods:Randomized Controlled Trials [RCTs] published in the years 2013 & 2014 in five pharmacology journals with high impact factor, The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (JCP), British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (BJCP), European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (EJCP), Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics (JPP) and Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) were assessed for adherence to the statistical components of CONSORT statement.Results:Of the 174 RCTs analysed, 103 described the method of sample size calculation. Of the five journals, maximum reports in JCP (34/50) and minimum in IJP (13/31) adhered to the CONSORT checklist [item 7a-sample size calculation]. Most reports mentioned the statistical methods used for analysis of data. (171/174) as per the checklist [item 12=statistical methods used]. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was the most commonly used test (88/174). The software used for statistical analysis was mentioned in 111 RCTs and SPSS was used more frequently (58/111). The exact p value was stated in 108 reports. Certain errors in statistical analysis were also noted (40/174).Conclusion:These findings show inconsistencies and non- adherence to the statistical components of the CONSORT statement especially with respect to sample size calculation. Special attention must be paid to the statistical accuracy of the reports.

Temporal trends in pharmacology publications by pharmacy institutes: A deeper dig.

Objective:Publications in Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) are the face of contemporary pharmacology practices followed in health-care profession - a knowledge-based profession. It depicts trends in terms of quantity (proportions), quality, type (preclinical/clinical), thrust areas, etc., of pharmacology followed by biomedical community professions both nationally and internationally. This article aims to establish temporal trends in pharmacology research by pharmacy institutes in light of its publications to IJP from 2010 to 2015.Methodology:The website of IJP was searched for publications year and issue wise for contributing authors from pharmacy institutions and analyzed for types of publications, their source and the categories of research documented in these publications.Results:A total of 1034 articles were published, of which 189 (18%) articles were published by pharmacy institutes, of which 90% (n = 170) were contributed from pharmacy institutes within India whereas 10% (n = 19) from international pharmacy institutes. 75% of these were research publication, the majority of which (65%) were related to preclinical screening of phytochemical constituents from plants.Conclusion:With multi and interdisciplinary collaborations in pharmacy profession the trend needs to improve toward molecular and cellular pharmacology and clinical studies.

Standard of reporting animal-based experimental research in Indian Journal of Pharmacology.

Objective:The objective of present study was to survey and determine the reporting standards of animal studies published during three years from 2012 to 2014 in the Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP).Material and Methods:All issues of IJP published in the year 2012, 2013 and 2014 were reviewed to identify animal studies. Each animal study was searched for 15 parameters specifically designed to review standards of animal experimentation and research methodology.Observation:All published studies had clearly defined aims and objectives while a statement on ethical clearance about the study protocol was provided in 97% of papers. Information about animal strain and sex was given in 91.8% and 90% of papers respectively. Age of experimental animals was mentioned by 44.4% papers while source of animals was given in 50.8% papers. Randomization was reported by 37.4% while 9.9% studies reported blinding. Only 3.5% studies mentioned any limitations of their work.Conclusion:Present study demonstrates relatively good reporting standards in animal studies published in IJP. The items which need to be improved are randomization, blinding, sample size calculation, stating the limitations of study, sources of support and conflict of interest. The knowledge shared in the present paper could be used for better reporting of animal based experiments.

Strategy support for the Post‐Market Monitoring (PMM) of GM plants: Review of existing PMM strategies developed for the safety assessment of human and animal health

Strategy support for the Post‐Market Monitoring (PMM) of GM plants: Review of existing PMM strategies developed for the safety assessment of human and animal health

Retracted: Spontaneous rectus sheath haematoma associated with rivaroxaban treatment.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpt.12228/pdf The above article, published online on 10 November 2014 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), has been retracted by agreement between the authors, the journal Editor in Chief, A. Li Wan Po, and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. The retraction has been agreed because, unknown to the authors, another group published a similar study based on the same material in the Indian Journal of Pharmacology: Kocayigit I, Can Y, Sahinkus S, etal. Spontaneous rectus sheath haematoma during rivaroxaban therapy. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 2014;46(3):339-340. doi:10.4103/0253-7613.132193.

Quality of reporting statistics in two Indian pharmacology journals.

Objective:To evaluate the reporting of the statistical methods in articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals.Materials and Methods:All original articles published since 2002 were downloaded from the journals’ (Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) and Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology (IJPP)) website. These articles were evaluated on the basis of appropriateness of descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics was evaluated on the basis of reporting of method of description and central tendencies. Inferential statistics was evaluated on the basis of fulfilling of assumption of statistical methods and appropriateness of statistical tests. Values are described as frequencies, percentage, and 95% confidence interval (CI) around the percentages.Results:Inappropriate descriptive statistics was observed in 150 (78.1%, 95% CI 71.7–83.3%) articles. Most common reason for this inappropriate descriptive statistics was use of mean ± SEM at the place of “mean (SD)” or “mean ± SD.” Most common statistical method used was one-way ANOVA (58.4%). Information regarding checking of assumption of statistical test was mentioned in only two articles. Inappropriate statistical test was observed in 61 (31.7%, 95% CI 25.6–38.6%) articles. Most common reason for inappropriate statistical test was the use of two group test for three or more groups.Conclusion:Articles published in two Indian pharmacology journals are not devoid of statistical errors.

Reporting of sample size and power in negative clinical trials published in Indian medical journals

Background and Aim: It is observed that negative clinical trials published in medical journals are poor in reporting of sample size calculation, various components of calculation of sample size. It is also observed that they are underpowered to detect the actual difference between the treatment outcomes. Because of scarcity of these data for Indian medical journals we designed this study to critically analyze the Indian medical journals for reporting of sample size, components of sample size and power. We calculated post hoc power for 30% and 50% difference between the treatment outcomes. Materials and Methods: All the negative clinical trials published in five Indian medical journals (Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP), Indian Pediatrics (IP), Indian Journal of Dermatology (IJD), Indian Journal of Dermatology, Vanereology and Leprology (IJDVL), and Journal of Postgraduate Medicine (JPGM)), between 2001 and 2008, were analyzed by each author for reporting of the sample size and components of the sample size. Post hoc power for 30% and 50% differences between the outcome was calculated by G Power software. All data were expressed as frequency, percentages, and 95% confidence interval around the percentages with the help of SPSS ver. 17. Results: The median sample size was observed to be 33 (range 9-85). Power was calculated in 28 (41.1%, 95% CI 30.2% to 53%) trials. The sample size was not calculated in 34 (50%, 95% CI 38.4% to 61.5%) trials. The full sample size was calculated in only 2 (2.9%, 95% CI 0.8% to 10.1%) trials. Post hoc power above 80% for 30% of difference was reported in 3 (4.4%, 95% CI 1.5% to 12%) trials and for 50% difference in outcome it was reported in 42 (61.7%, 95% CI 49.8% to 72.3) trials. Conclusion: Negative clinical trials published in five Indian journals are poor in reporting of sample size calculation. It is also observed that most of trials are underpowered to see the 30% and 50% difference between the outcomes. There is a need to generate more awareness regarding the sample size and power calculation

The novelty of research article: Whose responsibility is it?

Sir, I would like to comment on the article entitled “Effective control of sickle cell disease with hydroxyurea therapy”[1] published in Jan-Feb, 2010 issue of Indian Journal of Pharmacology. I have found nothing novel about the topic which makes it to be published. Any research article must meet certain criteria and standards that are set by the editorial and review committee before it can be published. That said, I saw nothing novel in the study, the main objective of which was the evaluation of hydroxyurea therapy in sickle cell patients. This has already been well studied and established for some time;[2,3] indeed, this is referenced in the article itself and in standard pharmacology texts.[4,5] In the 15 years that I have instructed undergraduate and postgraduate medical students in Pharmacology, I have routinely taught about the effectiveness and safety of hydroxyurea in the control of sickle cell disease. I would therefore enquire the authors and other concerned members about the criteria that merited publication of the article in the journal.

A commitment renewed

With this issue, a new editorial team takes over the reins of Indian Journal of Pharmacology. Although the names (and designations) may have changed (a little), the dedication remains the same. The new Chief Editor and the editorial team feel honored in doing a job that has been done so admirably in the past by a number of stalwarts. Today, IJP in its current form is the result of their cumulated wisdom and devotion. We would consider ourselves successful even if we are able to maintain the existing standards, if not improve them. I strongly believe this will be the best tribute to all our worthy predecessors! We are aware that we have to work on several fronts, from the quantity, quality, and variety of the papers to the new columns and nonreceipt of the journal! I am sure that all these issues can be handled successfully if we continue to get your active cooperation. With the recent inclusion in PubMed (many thanks to our publishers M/s Medknow Publications and Media Pvt Ltd. and especially Dr. D. K. Sahu), the IJP has achieved all that a journal may aspire. It is the right time, friends, to try us first for the publication of your quality works! None of us is a qualified/professional editor. We have, however, trained ourselves by experience. It is still quite possible that we may be found lacking in several areas. Please bear with us for our omissions. Trust me they are not deliberate! A scientific journal can have only one objective, i.e., to serve the discipline it belongs to. Reviewers, authors, and readers are the backbone of the journal. A journal can only be as good as we are. With this issue, we rededicate ourselves to the cause of pharmacology (and pharmacologists) in India and abroad! Come, friends, join us on a journey towards this noble task.

Small journal vs. high impact journal: Dilemma of a new author

Small journal vs. high impact journal: Dilemma of a new author

Bidding adieu IJP

My term as Chief Editor ends with this issue. I had a great experience as Editor of the Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) for 3 years. I cherish these memorable moments. I am also feeling good about my contribution to the Society. The new incumbent, Dr. RK Dikshit, is an able and suitable candidate to be the Chief Editor, and has served IJP as Executive Editor for 3 years. He has contributed immensely during this period and he is the right person to continue the good work. Any takeover has to be smooth and complete; we cannot and should not be starting from scratch. Starting from scratch leads to a loss of valuable data and expertise and the credits gained by the journal take a dip. A communication gap does most damage to authors, who lose out on the articles they submitted in the previous regime. Hence, I assure that the changeover is smooth and complete. The journal needs committed reviewers. With increasing specialization and researchers getting more focused, reviewers with generic interest may not be able to do justice to certain areas of research. We have been inviting researchers, monitoring the reviewers and trying to build up the database of reviewers with varied research interests. The online system also has a facility to search and invite reviewers through PubMed from distant places. Distance, therefore, is not a deterrent if the valuable manuscripts get their due justice. Young researchers and academicians should be motivated to publish and also review. A formal training in scientific writing and reviewing should be made mandatory in all postgraduate courses in pharmacology. Senior reviewers can train their proteges and students and initiate them into this difficult task from an early stage. The members of the current editorial team conducted three workshops on scientific writing so far, the latest one being the 28th Annual Conference of Indian Pharmacological Society, Gujarat Chapter, at Karamsad. As this journal caters to basic and clinical researchers in pharmacology, a balance needs to be maintained between the articles published. The present editorial board has tried to bridge this gap and bring in a balance by encouraging articles on drug utilisation studies, pharmacovigilance, pharmacoepidemiology and clinical research in a journal without compromising on good quality and relevant articles on basic research in pharmacology. As the stature of the journal increases, a reverse trend of offshore researchers submitting their research work to an “Indian” journal may occur. IJP has been receiving articles from Malaysia, China, Turkey, Nigeria and Nepal. We must strive to take it farther. The most important development for the Journal is the listing in PubMed and Science Citation Index. This has increased the global accessibility of scientific articles from IJP and credibility to the authors. This was possible only by the constant striving of our publisher, Medknow Publications, and the editorial team. I sincerely thank Dr. DK Sahu for his personal efforts in this direction. I am sure he will continue to lend the support to our Journal. I also feel, as outgoing Chief Editor, that the quality of pharmacology research is diminishing in India. The reasons may be political or inadequate facilities in the educational institutes, or may be animal right issues. It is time that the Society steps in and does some soul-searching to discover the reasons for the decrease in good-quality pharmacology research. Pharmacology as a science has an immense role to play in the discovery of new drugs in future within India. We need liberal laws to encourage research that will eventually help in finding new drugs for many neglected diseases. Thank you for providing me an opportunity to work with this Journal. I have learnt a lot academically and also on human and professional fronts, some the hard way and some the nice way. I thank all Executive members of the Society for giving me an opportunity to serve this great Journal. I wish the Journal a great success under the leadership of the now Chief Editor. Good Bye