Cargando…

Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review

Implementation Science has been published for six years and over that time has gone from receiving 100 articles in 2006 to receiving 354 in 2011; our impact factor has risen from 2.49 in June 2010 to 3.10 in June 2012. Whilst our article publication rate has also risen, it has risen much less slowly...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eccles, Martin P, Foy, Robbie, Sales, Anne, Wensing, Michel, Mittman, Brian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3443070/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22839967
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-71
_version_ 1782243514765017088
author Eccles, Martin P
Foy, Robbie
Sales, Anne
Wensing, Michel
Mittman, Brian
author_facet Eccles, Martin P
Foy, Robbie
Sales, Anne
Wensing, Michel
Mittman, Brian
author_sort Eccles, Martin P
collection PubMed
description Implementation Science has been published for six years and over that time has gone from receiving 100 articles in 2006 to receiving 354 in 2011; our impact factor has risen from 2.49 in June 2010 to 3.10 in June 2012. Whilst our article publication rate has also risen, it has risen much less slowly than our submission rate—we published 29 papers in 2006 and 134 papers in 2011 and we now publish only around 40 % of submissions. About one-half of submitted manuscripts are rejected without being sent out for peer review; it has become clear that there are a number of common issues that result in manuscripts being rejected at this stage. We hope that by publishing this editorial on our common reasons for rejection without peer review we can help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3443070
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34430702012-09-15 Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review Eccles, Martin P Foy, Robbie Sales, Anne Wensing, Michel Mittman, Brian Implement Sci Editorial Implementation Science has been published for six years and over that time has gone from receiving 100 articles in 2006 to receiving 354 in 2011; our impact factor has risen from 2.49 in June 2010 to 3.10 in June 2012. Whilst our article publication rate has also risen, it has risen much less slowly than our submission rate—we published 29 papers in 2006 and 134 papers in 2011 and we now publish only around 40 % of submissions. About one-half of submitted manuscripts are rejected without being sent out for peer review; it has become clear that there are a number of common issues that result in manuscripts being rejected at this stage. We hope that by publishing this editorial on our common reasons for rejection without peer review we can help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science. BioMed Central 2012-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3443070/ /pubmed/22839967 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-71 Text en Copyright ©2012 Eccles et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Editorial
Eccles, Martin P
Foy, Robbie
Sales, Anne
Wensing, Michel
Mittman, Brian
Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title_full Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title_fullStr Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title_full_unstemmed Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title_short Implementation Science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
title_sort implementation science six years on—our evolving scope and common reasons for rejection without review
topic Editorial
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3443070/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22839967
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-7-71
work_keys_str_mv AT ecclesmartinp implementationsciencesixyearsonourevolvingscopeandcommonreasonsforrejectionwithoutreview
AT foyrobbie implementationsciencesixyearsonourevolvingscopeandcommonreasonsforrejectionwithoutreview
AT salesanne implementationsciencesixyearsonourevolvingscopeandcommonreasonsforrejectionwithoutreview
AT wensingmichel implementationsciencesixyearsonourevolvingscopeandcommonreasonsforrejectionwithoutreview
AT mittmanbrian implementationsciencesixyearsonourevolvingscopeandcommonreasonsforrejectionwithoutreview