by
| Reprinted with permission from: |  |
|
( |
|
Abstract
What if you could track your manuscript's review progress, just as you track the location of a package on the shipper's Web site? You can at the new journal Neoplasia.
What are the hallmarks of a premiere scientific journal? Prompt and thorough peer review, followed by timely publication. It is a primary mission of Neoplasia - a new broad-based cancer journal launched this year at the American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylviania - to provide these services to the international community of oncology researchers.
In order to meet these goals, Neoplasia has implemented an innovative peer-review system on its Web site. The core of the peer-review system is a secure Web database for tracking submitted manuscripts, which preserves the anonymity of reviewers but makes the process more transparent and interactive for authors.
Authors may submit their manuscripts electronically via a user-friendly Web interface. Neoplasia can then forward the manuscript to reviewers over the Internet, which saves time and money. At the time of submission, authors provide a password. Using this password, they may follow the status of their paper in real time as it travels through the peer-review process. They are able to view information such as the date when the manuscript was received, the dates when it was sent to each reviewer, and the expected dates for completion of review. If a review is delayed, the circumstances causing the delay are also indicated on the Web site.
Reviewers also submit their comments through the Neoplasia Web site. These are posted immediately on the authors' password-protected Web page. Thus, authors have immediate access to reviews as they are submitted, even before an editorial decision is made. When the editors reach a decision about whether or not to publish an article, or whether to require further information, these decisions also appear on the database. The reviewers may then access a password-protected page to view the other reviewers' comments as well as the editorial decision.
We believe that the real-time and interactive nature of the Neoplasia peer-review system increases accountability, both for editors and for reviewers. Neoplasia has taken a bold step in this direction, revealing on the Web site the timeliness of our overall peer review process. We achieve this by using a computer program that automatically searches through the Neoplasia database every night and updates the statistics for time elapsed during review, posting them on the Web site.
We have created this novel, Web-based peer-review process in the hope that it will accelerate the modification and revision of manuscripts, and encourage publication of "late-breaking" discoveries in Neoplasia. We have accomplished these goals within the first few months of Neoplasia's existence. Many enthusiastic authors have reported that they began to formulate their manuscript modifications and their reply to the first reviewer while waiting for the second review. They also appreciated the ability to check on their manuscript status at any time, 24 hours a day. As of March 31, 1999, the average time from the receipt of a manuscript to an editorial decision was only 17.7 days.
Brian D. Ross is the editor of Neoplasia. He is also an associate professor of radiology and biological chemistry at the University of Michigan.
Andrzej Krauze is an illustrator, poster maker, cartoonist, and painter who illustrates regularly for HMS Beagle, The Guardian, The Sunday Telegraph, Bookseller, and New Statesman.
Electronic Journals: A Selected Resource Guide - a great resource, including the history of e-journals and the main issues involved in their production, management, and use.
Scholarly Communication and Technology - an excellent collection of papers on the economics and evolution of e-journals. Papers from the Conference organized by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation at Emory University, April 24-25, 1997.
International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communications - another excellent collection of abstracts and articles on the processes of scientific publication.
Storming the Barricades - an article from New Scientist focused on the impact of the internet on the peer review process.
The Future of Medical Publishing - HMS Beagle Cutting Edge debate comprising interviews with editors of the most prestigious medical journals in the world.