Journal Office Research Articles

Editorial Note

Editorial Note Cristanne Miller As you will have noticed in the last several months, we seem to be at a moment of high popular and scholarly interest in Dickinson. This is partly because of the number of novels, biographies, and critical books on the poet that have come out over the past five years, in the United States and around the world. On the popular front, in 2010, the New York Botanical Garden featured an exhibit called "Emily Dickinson's Garden"; air time was given to Dickinson on National Public Radio and Terry Gross's "Fresh Air"; and Garrison Keillor is participating in a fundraising event for the Dickinson Museum in Amherst this December 9, the day before the poet's birthday. To mention just a few examples on the scholarly side, five books devoted to Dickinson were published in 2010, three of those five in England—including Lyndall Gordon's widely reviewed Lives Like Loaded Guns: Emily Dickinson and Her Family's Feuds (Virago). In France, the 1996 Profils Americains issue on Emily Dickinson, edited by Antoine Cazé, has just been reprinted (copies can be ordered from Presses Universitaires de la Méditerranée, 17 rue Abbé-de-l'Épée, F-34090 Montpellier, France), and in Germany, noted translator Gunhild Kuebler is translating all of Dickinson's poems into rhymed and metered verse in German. Domhnall Mitchell and Maria Stuart's International Reception of Emily Dickinson (2009) speaks directly to the international attention Dickinson is currently receiving, as well as that she has received in the past. This issue of the Journal contains eight reviews of books published in the past year or two, and we anticipate publishing several more reviews in our Spring 2011 issue. While the Journal is firmly in the loop of publications on Dickinson in the United States, it is not always easy for us to procure information about books appearing on Dickinson outside the States or in languages besides English. If you know about such a publication and think it should be reviewed in our pages, please send appropriate information either to me directly at ccmiller@buffalo.edu or to the Journal office at ubedj@buffalo.edu. Scholarship is always a communal enterprise, and I hope that the Emily Dickinson Journal acknowledges and helps to extend the breadth of the community of Dickinson's readers through its reviews as well as through its essays. [Begin Page vii] Copyright © 2010 The Johns Hopkins University Press

John Case Nemiah, M.D. 1918–2009

John Case Nemiah, M.D. 1918–2009

Editorial

You have accessMoreSectionsView PDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Cite this article Berry Michael 2010EditorialProc. R. Soc. A.4661–2http://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2009.0535SectionYou have accessEditorialEditorial Michael Berry Michael Berry Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Michael Berry Michael Berry Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Published:11 November 2009https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2009.0535In my last editorial, I explained that in order to cope with the large number of papers that were being submitted to Proc. R. Soc. A, every paper we received would be pre-assessed by a member of the Editorial Board, and referees for papers that passed this hurdle were asked to apply stringent quality standards. These procedures, initiated by my predecessor Trevor Stuart, have now proved successful in several ways. Referees no longer waste time reporting on papers that have no chance of being accepted—sometimes because they are poor, but more often because although they contain good science their content is deemed suitable for a more specialist journal. Publication has been greatly accelerated: the current receipt to acceptance time is 90 days. Moreover, the rejection rate has been brought down from an unrealistic height of more than 80 per cent to a more reasonable 72 per cent (getting the right rate is delicate: with 100 per cent, nobody would submit papers; with 0 per cent, we would be publishing trash).These improvements would not have occurred without the efforts of Joanna Harries and Louise Gardner in the journal office, the Society’s publications production staff and, of course, indispensable advice from the Editorial Board.Proc. R. Soc. A aims to publish papers across the whole of the physical sciences. I am interpreting this very widely. Recently, we have published serious scientific studies of a painting by Monet (interpreting the position of the sun to determine where and when it was painted; Baker & Thornes 2006), Viking navigation (to determine whether they could have used the polarization of skylight; Hedegus et al. 2007), erasing toner on office paper (to enable it to be re-used; Counsell & Allwood 2009), stability of the Millennium bridge (MacDonald 2009), dynamics of golf swings (Sharp 2009), efficiency of gaits (Srinivasan & Ruina 2007), stresses (in the cork) during the opening of wine bottles (De Pascalis et al. 2007), etc. These outliers supplement our core papers, reporting substantial, occasionally seminal, advances in quantum physics, engineering, information science, materials science, pure and applied mathematics, and chemistry (for which we are at last starting to attract papers in numbers commensurate with the scientific importance of that subject).A curse of researchers, publishers and editors is the fashionable emphasis on bibliometric indicators. Chief among these evils is the impact factor. Ours is increasing but still rather low (currently 1.7). But the impact factor is a measure only of short-term success (citations over the preceding 2 years); for Proc. R. Soc. A, a better indicator is the citation half-life. Ours is off-scale: greater than ten years, reflecting our aim of publishing slow-burning, long-lasting, papers.In this anniversary year, celebrating 350 years since the foundation of the Royal Society, we plan to publish a series of invited articles, contributed by world-leading authorities across the range of subjects that we cover. The first of these, ‘Nanostructured Bainite’, by H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia (Bhadeshia 2010), appears in this issue. These articles will reinforce our position as one of the best, as well as the oldest, journals of physical science.Footnotes© 2009 The Royal SocietyReferencesBaker J.& Thornes J. E.. 2006Solar position within Monet’s Houses of Parliament. Proc. R. Soc. A 462, 3775-3788(doi:10.1098/rspa.2006.1754). Link, Google ScholarBhadeshia H. K. H. D.. 2010Nanostructured Bainite. Proc. R. Soc. A 466, 2113(doi:10.1098/rspa.2009.0407). Link, Google ScholarCounsell T. A. M.& Allwood J. M.. 2009Using solvents to remove a toner print so that office paper might be reused. Proc. R. Soc. A 465, 3839-3858(doi:10.1098/rspa.2009.0144). Link, Google ScholarDe Pascalis R., Destrade M.& Saccomandi G.. 2007The stress field in a pulled cork and some subtle points in the semi-inverse method of nonlinear elasticity. Proc. R. Soc. A 463, 2945-2959(doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.0010). Link, Google ScholarHegedüs R., Åkesson S., Wehner R.& Horváth G.. 2007Could Vikings have navigated under foggy and cloudy conditions by skylight polarization?: On the atmospheric optical prerequisites of polarimetric Viking navigation under foggy and cloudy skies. Proc. R. Soc. A 463, 1081-1095(doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1811). Link, Google ScholarMacdonald J. H. G.. 2009Lateral excitation of bridges by balancing pedestrians. Proc. R. Soc. A 465, 1055-1073(doi:10.1098/rspa.2009.0367). Link, Google ScholarSharp R. S.. 2009On the mechanics of the golf swing. Proc. R. Soc. A 465, 551-570(doi:10.1098/rspa.2008.0304). Link, Google ScholarSrinivasan M.& Ruina A.. 2007Idealized walking and running gaits minimize work. Proc. R. Soc. A 463, 2429-2446(doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.0006). Link, Google Scholar Next Article VIEW FULL TEXT DOWNLOAD PDF FiguresRelatedReferencesDetails This Issue08 January 2010Volume 466Issue 2113 Article InformationDOI:https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2009.0535Published by:Royal SocietyPrint ISSN:1364-5021Online ISSN:1471-2946History: Published online11/11/2009Published in print08/01/2010 License:© 2009 The Royal Society Citations and impact

A change at the top!

doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2009.10.003 In discussions on this journal, it has been said many times and in many contexts that we've come a long way. Given that JNI is now running like a well-oiled machine with myself, Professor Celia Brosnan and Professor Suhayl DhibJalbut performing the editorial work, a dedicated panel of reviewers maintaining a healthy flow of manuscripts, and JoAnn Leone managing the journal office, one might be inclined not to change anything and to keep a good thing going. But what about the future? In 2008, I retired from front-line research, disbanded a wonderful research group of many years and closed a large laboratory—difficult

Puzzles in Practice

Correspondence: Yehia Y. Mishriki, MD, FACP, Professor of Clinical Medicine, Penn State University College of Medicine, 1210 S. Cedar Crest Blvd., Ste. 3600, Allentown, PA 18103. Tel: 610-402-1150 Fax: 610-402-1153 E-mail: yehia.mishriki@lvh.com Case Report A 55-year-old woman with a medical history signifi cant for hypercholesterolemia presented for a routine evaluation. She stated she also had a benign left parotid gland tumor removed in 1988. Following the surgery she had slight loss of sensation anterior to her left ear. She also stated that when she ate, she developed “dripping” from the left side of her Global reprints distributed only by Postgraduate Medicine USA. No part of Postgraduate Medicine may be reproduced or transmitted in any form without written permission from the publisher. All permission requests to reproduce or adapt published material must be directed to the journal office in Berwyn, PA, no other persons or offices are authorized to act on our behalf. Requests should include a statement describing how material will be used, the complete article citation, a copy of the figure or table of interest as it appeared in the journal, and a copy of the “new” (adapted) material if appropriate

Vaccination site reaction or bacterial cellulitis?

Large inflammatory reactions are relatively common after pre-school boosters, whereas injection-related bacterial cellulitis is vanishingly rare. By taking note of the minimal tenderness, fever and toxicity present with the former, paediatricians should be able to avoid unnecessary antibiotic treatment for the latter and reassure parents of the likelihood of spontaneous resolution over several days. However, to avoid missing an instance of bacterial cellulitis at an early stage, it would be prudent to ask parents to report any unexpected progression in fever, toxicity or lesional discomfort so that the situation can be reassessed. The Upshots column in Paediatrics & Child Health is meant to address practical questions without ready answers in standard references such as the Red Book or the Canadian Immunization Guide. Readers are invited to submit questions to the Journal office. A timely response will be provided, whenever possible, from one member of a panel of experts. The most interesting exchanges will be selected for publication. Submitters should identify themselves, but will be given the option of anonymity in the published version. Submit questions directly to ac.spc@lanruoj. Please note that these may be edited for clarity and brevity. David Scheifele MD Associate Editor, Paediatrics & Child Health

Veterinary Dermatology in 2009

<i>Veterinary Dermatology</i> in 2009

Issues and Best Practices Related to Ethical Writing and Publishing

For decades there have been several common ethical issues in writing and publishing that have plagued nurse authors and editors. These have included authorship, duplicate or redundant publication, conflicts of interest (including financial), misconduct, and peer review. These topics have been discussed independently and together, but it has not been until recently that appropriate guidelines or best practices have emerged. Nursing and other scientific journals have struggled with these issues continuously and now organizations (e.g., International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and Office of Integrity) have developed guidelines and best practices to help authors and editors.

The Editorship: A Reflection on the Past and a Look to the Future

The Family Journal office is moving from Texas A&amp;M University—Corpus Christi to Mississippi College as Kaye W. Nelson completes her 3-year commitment and Steve Southern assumes sole editorship. A retrospective view of the past 3 years is presented, as is a prospective for the future.

Preamble for special issue honouring John F. MacGregor

Preamble for special issue honouring John F. MacGregor

ADDENDUM: "STUDY ON THE SUPERCONDUCTIVITY OF AMORPHOUS COMPOSITE METAL"

This addendum to the above-named article is made to address the issue that A/P Wang Yinfeng has applied to be promoted from A/P to Full Professor by using the above-named paper. Professor J. D. Fan, the proceedings editor for the Sixth International Conference on New Theories, Discoveries and Applications of Superconductors and Related Materials, has mentioned that there are severe contradictions between faculty members in the College of Math & Physics, Chongqing University (CQU), and it is quite clear that Liu Anping is the major person who illegally plagiarized other’s results of research as his publications, and included three other people as co-authors, including Professor Wang Yinfeng, the major leader of the college. Professor J. D. Fan supports any measures and action that IJMPB Journal Office might take against Liu Anping et al., and IJMPB Journal Office will retract the above-named paper from the journal, and prohibit the above-named offending authors from publishing any papers in IJMPB and all other World Scientific copyright publications for 3–5 years.

Celebrating 100 years of publishing discovery in physiology 1908 – 2008

Celebrating 100 years of publishing discovery in physiology 1908 – 2008

How long can we expect pertussis protection to last after the adolescent booster dose of tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccines?

Possibly 10 years. The longest published follow-up extended five years, at which time antibody levels and cell-mediated immunity were still readily detectable (1). The slow antibody decay pattern suggests that protection will last for at least 10 years (2). However, antibody levels do not correlate well with protection against pertussis, so proof of ongoing protection will have to come from epi-demiological studies. A major challenge for pertussis control is that neither natural infection nor immunization induce life-long immunity against subsequent infection. After the introduction of pertussis vaccine more than five decades ago, disease incidence decreased dramatically from 157 per 100,000 individuals in the prevaccine era to less than one per 100,000 individuals in the early 1970s, a decrease of more than 99%. The majority of remaining cases were noted in children younger than 10 years of age. Over the past two decades, a gradual increase in pertussis incidence has occurred (Figure 1), reaching 8.9 per 100,000 individuals per year in 2004, with the majority of cases now seen in adolescents and adults (1,2), who are the major source of infection for young infants (3). Fully immunized children older than six months of age are well protected by acellular vaccines. Young infants often have severe pertussis, and account for most related deaths (4). To improve disease control, all provinces and territories have expanded their pertussis immunization programs to include a booster dose for adolescents, namely the tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccine. Two such products that contain reduced amounts of diphtheria and certain pertussis antigens to minimize side effects are currently approved for use in adolescents and adults. Adverse effects occur at approximately the same rates with Tdap, and combined tetanus-diphtheria vaccines. Figure 1 Incidence rate of pertussis infections in Canada between 1924 and 2004, based on notifications to Health Canada. Reproduced from reference 10 The mechanism of immunity to pertussis after natural infection or immunization is complex and not fully understood. Immunity has been shown to wane seven to 20 years after natural infection and five to 10 years after immunization with whole cell vaccines (5). Current acellular vaccines elicit antibodies to the key antigens of pertussis including pertussis toxin, pertactin (PRN), filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA) and fimbriae, but the minimum serum antibody concentrations that protect against infection have not yet been determined. Cell-mediated immunity against pertussis is also elicited by immunization, but its role in protecting against infection is unclear (6,7). Edelman et al (7) recently reported persistence of immunoglobulin G antibodies against PRN and FHA, five years after Tdap booster vaccination of adolescents. They also demonstrated persistent cell-mediated immunity responses against pertussis toxin, PRN and FHA, consistent with ongoing immune memory. Thus, the authors predicted that adequate protection would extend beyond five years and probably to 10 years postimmunization (7). That means adolescent vaccinees may again become susceptible to pertussis as young adults and/or parents, and pose a risk for young infants. Developing strategies to extend protection among adults will be essential for maximal disease control. Implementing Tdap boosters every 10 years in adults is unlikely to be sufficient given the poor compliance with 10-yearly tetanus-diphtheria boosters. Innovative approaches are needed, such as targeting adults about to start a family or possibly boosting women during pregnancy (a subject of ongoing studies) (8). Recently, a group of pertussis researchers recommended a ‘cocooning’ strategy, which entails immunization of family members and close contacts of the newborn, aiming to create a protective environment for the most vulnerable infants where it is economically feasible (9). Awareness about pertussis, its risks and the importance of vaccination needs to be emphasized to adolescents and adults, including health care workers and day care providers who care for children. Paediatricians should ensure that they and their office staff have set a good example. The Upshots column in Paediatrics & Child Health is meant to address practical questions without ready answers in standard references such as the Red Book or the Canadian Immunization Guide. Readers are invited to submit questions to the journal office. A timely response will be provided, whenever possible, from one member of a panel of experts. The most interesting exchanges will be selected for publication. Submitters should identify themselves, but will be given the option of anonymity in the published version. Submitted questions may be edited for clarity and brevity. David Scheifele MD Associate Editor, Paediatrics & Child Health

Continuing professional development self‐assessment quiz: A new paradigm for operative dentistry

The Continuing Professional Development self‐assessment quiz is now online. Test your knowledge by first reading the review A new paradigm for operative dentistry by Mount on page 264. Then go to http:www.ada.org.au. Click on “Journal” and follow the links until you find this month's issue. Submit your answers and in an instant you'll know how you scored! Alternatively, answer the following questions and forward the completed questionnaire to the Australian Dental Journal Office, and we will let you know how you scored. Place a tick in the box alongside the option that you think provides the best answer to each question. The Editor's decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into. Completion of this quiz entitles you to 1 CPD hour.

The Language of the Outlaw: A Clarification

In his definitive biography of Joyce, Richard Ellmann quotes exten sively from a pamphlet entitled Language of the Outlaw (JJII 9In). Joyce relied on this text to craft one of the most famous sections of Ulysses, the recitation of John F. Taylor's speech in the Aeolus episode (U 7.791-870).l Professor MacHugh rehearses the speech?a lively discourse in favor of the Irish language?before the men in the Freeman's Journal office, and the analogy that organizes the argument, and indeed appears throughout Ulysses, would have been familiar in 1904: the Irish, like the Israelites enslaved in ancient Egypt, were a chosen people oppressed by a rich and powerful empire.2 My initial attempt to locate this source pamphlet was unsuccessful, and eventu ally the reason for this seemed clear. Ellmann, who quotes the pam phlet at length in both the biography and The Consciousness of Joyce, fails to note its author:3 the Irish nationalist and revolutionary Roger Casement.

EDITORIAL

I would like to take this opportunity to let you know about some of the changes we are implementing at the journal. For me, the most exciting change has been the introduction of our on-line submission and review site at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jrm. This will significantly reduce the time for review completion as well as improve communication between the journal office and you, the contributor. Hopefully, allowing you to track the progress of your manuscript through the system will alleviate some of the concerns many of you have expressed to me as well as eliminate the chance of undue delay with the review process. Ultimately, the net result will be a considerably quicker time to publication. Inevitably, there will be teething problems with the system, and we have experienced one or two minor problems that we are fixing. As an example, the keyword assignation does not currently work. However, we are aware of this and will have it fixed by the time you read this. Please let me know of any other glitches you run into or any ways in which you think we can improve the system. I hope that the more streamlined system will make this journal a more attractive option when you are making the choice as to where to submit your work. Also please remember that while this is the Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, the emphasis is on the word Reconstructive. Along with the mission statement of the American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery, which, thanks to Dr. Strauch's generosity is now the owner of the journal, we are interested in all complex reconstructions, whether strictly microsurgical or not. So consider this journal for any papers related to reconstruction period!

Editorial

In recent years the journal has grown in stature and this is in part reflected by the journal impact factor (JIF). In 2005 for Veterinary Dermatology the JIF was 1.2 (31/129 in veterinary sciences). It is anticipated that this will improve in 2006. While the JIF is important when choosing a journal to submit material for publication, it is also important to consider who is going to read the article? Well the readership can expect to see in Veterinary Dermatology reviews, scientific papers, brief communications and case reports on diverse topics including the diagnosis, treatment and control of skin disease, skin pharmacology, structure and function of skin, and the production of hides, skins and skin products. If you would like to know more about the journal and particularly about the submission of an article then please go to http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/VDE and follow the links to author guidelines. Prospective authors should be aware that we use a peer-review process and send articles out to one of three co-editors who then sends to two independent reviewers – we may also use a statistician as required. Reviews are sought and a decision made thereafter by the co-editor – in some cases we may seek an opinion from another reviewer if required. The electronic process of submission and the editorial office based in Blackwell seek to make the process of review as quick and as transparent as possible. We welcome your articles on all aspects of veterinary dermatology. We are very grateful to all the board members and reviewers who give their time and expertise to review papers. In the last journal issue the abstracts from the European Society of Veterinary Dermatology-European College of Veterinary Dermatology (ESVD-ECVD) congress were published. Unfortunately, there was an error in transcription of one of the abstracts, which is regretted. It should have read: Della Salda L., Venuti A., Simeone P., Romanucci M., Malatesta D., Rizzo C., Palmieri C., Bongiovanni L. A novel papillomavirus identified in multiple skin neoplasms in twin goats (Veterinary Dermatology 2006; 16: 355). I am pleased to announce that the following people have joined the editorial board: John Angus, USA; Rosario Cerundolo, USA; Silvia Colombo, Italy; Cecilia Friberg, USA; Andrew Hillier USA, Judith Nimmo, Australia and Desmond Tobin, UK. They bring a variety of skills and experience to the board and we look forward to their support of the journal. Tim Nuttall, UK, has also been reappointed. We are also very pleased to welcome back to the board Gail Kunkle, who had a term on the board in the past and returns to share her considerable experience and expertise. We would like to express our great debt of gratitude to and appreciation for the members of the editorial board who are retiring from the board this year. They include Didier Carlotti, Carol Foil, Linda Frank, Keith Hnilica, Neil McEwen, Keith Thoday, Claudia von Tscharner, and Ton Willemse. They have given many hours of their time and expertise to review articles and submitted a great many of their own articles too. Without their efforts the journal would not be as successful as it is today. Peter Hill has stepped down as a co-editor and Joan Rest has stepped down as editor-in-chief (EiC), and they both remain on the board. The journal has thrived under their supervision and with their hard work. In the relatively short time that Joan has been the EiC, she has made many changes including the establishment of an electronic submission process, appointing and expanding the roles of translators and statisticians, making changes to improve the quality of the images, and arranged an agreement with the WCVD6 Hong Kong organizing committee to publish the proceedings in Veterinary Dermatology. A great many review articles have been published or commissioned and this has helped to promote the JIF and sales of the journal. The journal has increased in size in terms of page numbers and the editorial board has increased with more co-editors appointed, and the publishing schedule is much faster. There has also been reformatting of the journal to improve printing and paper legibility. There has recently been the establishment of an office for the journal based in Blackwell in Oxford. As EiC, Joan has worked tirelessly to improve the quality and status of the journal. We are indebted to her for all her efforts to promote the journal and the discipline of veterinary dermatology. It is a great privilege to take up the role of EiC and to work with the many people who contribute in various ways to the journal. I hope that you will feel able to support the journal as an author, reviewer, editor, reader, sponsor or correspondent. Please feel free to contact the journal through the journal office in Oxford via the e-mail address given below.

Continuing professional development self‐assessment quiz: Prevention of white spot lesions in orthodontic practice: a contemporary review

The Continuing Professional Development self‐assessment quiz is now online. Test your knowledge by first reading the review article Prevention of white spot lesions in orthodontic practice: a contemporary review by Sudjalim et al. o n page 284. Then go to http:www.ada.org.au. Click on “Publications” and follow the links to the Australian Dental Journal until you find this month's issue. Submit your answers and in an instant you'll know how you scored! Alternatively, answer the following questions and forward the completed questionnaire to the Australian Dental Journal Office, and we will let you know how you scored. Place a tick in the box alongside the option that you think provides the best answer to each question. The Editor's decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into.

Our International Connections

The American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education has been at the forefront of pharmacy education in the United States for almost 70 years. During that time the Journal has grown from a communication vehicle primarily among deans to an internationally recognized medium with readership among pharmacy faculty members, students, and other health disciplines. It is important that we have a realistic view of our international status and assess the opportunities that are open to us. Four years ago, when the Journal was only distributed in printed version, there were approximately 3000 subscribers, which included a few hundred international subscribers. The number of pharmacy faculty members in the United States at that time was approximately 4,000, indicating that our readership hardly reached all faculty members and represented minimal visibility among international readers. It is likely that print copies were passed from one faculty member to another, but this was not an efficient method of information dissemination and our overall visibility was limited. In January 2003, we began open-access, online publishing. As you know, the Journal is accessible by all without a password. While open-access publication changes the model for financial support of journals, it can greatly expand journal visibility. Over the past 6 months our readership has exceeded 20,000 unique individuals. Given the number of US pharmacy faculty (now about 4,200), this level of usage indicates a large contingent of international readers. At the Journal office, we are also seeing a large increase in international manuscript submissions and general inquiries. What is it about international readership that is important? It greatly expands the influence of our authors. By publishing in AJPE, our authors' work not only commands the attention of the US pharmacy academy but is also viewed throughout the world. As in the United States, many countries are struggling with issues related to medications and are looking to pharmacists to play a greater role in solving these problems. Through international exposure, much of what we are doing in the United States to upgrade pharmacy education becomes available to the world, including research articles, descriptions of new instructional methods, the best practices of our Teacher of the Year honorees, and abstracts from our meetings, as well as AACP council and committee proceedings. Given the great expense of medical publications and limited resources in most countries, an open-access journal such as AJPE is viewed as a unique opportunity for communication and advancement. There is no limit to the influence that our authors can have on pharmacy education throughout the world. Also, by opening channels to international authors, we learn about the best practices that are going on throughout the world and can use them to improve pharmacy education in the United States. Countries with health care delivery models quite different from our own have developed advanced roles for pharmacists, and corresponding instructional models that we would like to have here in the United States. We have already learned much from our Canadian colleagues over many years. Last year our Rufus Lyman Award winners for the best paper published in AJPE in 2004 were from the United Kingdom. Many of our individual colleges have recognized the benefits of international collaboration and have established shared programs and faculty member or student exchanges with colleges of pharmacy outside of the United States. For the Journal, we view the experience of the past few years as just the beginning of our international efforts. We would like to create a forum for more international contributions; most importantly, those that are of general interest and have the potential of influencing pharmacy education in many countries. As we continue to push pharmacy education forward and seek to identify innovation and improvements we should expand our international connections and identify the opportunities for progress.

Continuing professional development self‐assessment quiz: Dental hypersensitivity: a review

The Continuing Professional Development self‐assessment quiz is now online. Test your knowledge by first reading the review article Dentinal hypersensitivity: a review by Bartold on page 212. Then go to http:www.ada.org.au. Click on “Publications” and follow the links to the Australian Dental Journal until you find this month's issue. Submit your answers and in an instant you'll know how you scored! Alternatively, answer the following questions and forward the completed questionnaire to the Australian Dental Journal Office, and we will let you know how you scored. Place a tick in the box alongside the option that you think provides the best answer to each question. Some questions may have more than one correct answer. The Editor's decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into.