Background
An increasing number of general and affiliated specialty society journals make finding
the right place for manuscript submission of an article challenging. Little is known
about what factors surgeons hold important when choosing a journal for article submission.
Materials
A global e-mail survey of authors publishing in 5 general surgery journals (Annals
of Surgery, British Journal of Surgery, World Journal of Surgery, Archives of Surgery,
and Surgery) from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2008. Demographic data were collected.
15 arbitrarily chosen factors associated with submission strategy were rated for importance
on a 5-point modified Likert scale (ranging from 1 representing “unimportant” and
5 representing “very important”).
Results
Of 1,855 authors, 250 (14%) responded. Representing 41 countries, 23 (10%) of the
respondents were female and 250 (90%) were male. About two thirds of the authors had
less than 10 years of clinical practice, with general surgery or gastrointestinal
surgery as the major fields of interest represented. Of the 15 factors, the journal
“reputation” was rated “very important” (5 points) by 62% of the respondents, followed
by the journal “impact factor,” which was rated “very important” by 61%, although
some geographic differences were noted in this rating. Grouping several factors together
in categories, the journal “prestige” and “turnaround time” category was held to be
most important based on the average scores received. Age correlated with valued importance
of the journal reputation (Spearman rho=0.141; P=.033). The factors considered the least important included the journal's acceptance/rejection
rate, the option to suggest peer reviewers, and open access.
Conclusion
The majority of seasoned surgeons held the overall reputation of the journal as the
most important factor followed by the impact factor when choosing a journal for manuscript
submission.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Why should a surgeon publish?.Br J Surg. 2000; 87: 3-5
- Where can surgeons publish?.Br J Surg. 2000; 87: 261-264
- Future of surgery journals: good or bad?.J Am Coll Surg. 2006; 203: 192-197
- The history and meaning of the journal impact factor.JAMA. 2006; 295: 90-93
- The misused impact factor.Science. 2008; 322: 165
- Trends in the impact factor of scientific journals.Mayo Clin Proc. 2006; 81: 1401-1402
- Article and journal impact factor in various scientific fields.Am J Med Sci. 2008; 335: 188-191
- Reliability of journal impact factor rankings.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007; 7: 48
- The impact factor game. It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature.PLoS Med. 2006; 3: e291
- 21st-century biomedical journals: failures and futures.Lancet. 2003; 362: 1510-1512
- How to choose the right journal for your manuscript.Chest. 2007; 132: 1073-1076
- Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals.JAMA. 2002; 287: 2847-2850
- Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles.JAMA. 2002; 287: 2805-2808
- Survey design in orthopaedic surgery: getting surgeons to respond.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91: 27-34
Article info
Publication history
Published online: December 11, 2009
Accepted:
October 12,
2009
Identification
Copyright
© 2010 Mosby, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
