American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 143, Issue 4 , Pages 551-560.e1 , April 2007

The Outcome of Manuscripts Submitted to the American Journal of Ophthalmology Between 2002 and 2003

  • Thomas J. Liesegang

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida
    • Dr Liesegang is the Editor-in-Chief of the American Journal of Ophthalmology and receives an honorarium.
    • Involved in design and conduct of study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript and
    • Thomas J. Liesegang, MD, is the Editor-in-Chief of the American Journal of Ophthalmology.
    • Corresponding Author InformationInquiries to Thomas J. Liesegang, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL 32224
    • ,
  • Marwan Shaikh

      Affiliations

    • Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida
    • Involved in design and conduct of study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript and
    • Marwan Shaikh, BS, is presently a second-year medical student at the University of Toledo College of Medicine in Toledo, Ohio.
    • ,
  • Julia E. Crook

      Affiliations

    • Biostatistical Unit, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida.
    • involved in the statistical aspects of the study, and contributed to the data interpretation, review, and approval of the manuscript (J.E.C.).

,Accepted 5 December 2006.

References 

  1. Weber EJ, Katz PP, Waeckerle JF, Callaham ML. Author perception of peer-review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction. JAMA. 2002;287:2790–2793
  2. Corona G, Petrone L, Mannucci E, et al. Exploring the relationship between impact factor and manuscript rejection rates in radiologic journals. Acad Radiol. 2006;13:77–83
  3. Cartwright VA, McGhee CNJ. Ophthalmology and vision science research (Part 1: understanding and using journal impact factors and citation indices). J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:1999–2007
  4. Institute for Scientific Information. Journal citation reports. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Institute for Scientific Information, Inc; 1993;–1998
  5. Hecht F, Hecht BK, Sandberg AA. The journal “impact factor”: a misnamed, misleading, misused measure. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1998;104:77–81
  6. Koene HR, Overbeke AJ. The ultimate fate of articles rejected for publication in The Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1994;138:2443–2446
  7. Chew FS. Fate of manuscripts rejected for publication in the AJR. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;156:627–632
  8. Ray J, Berkwits M, Davidoff F. The fate of manuscripts rejected by a general medical journal. Am J Med. 2000;109:131–135
  9. Mundy DJ. Time needed for publication of journal articles. Ann Intern Med. 1984;101:61–62
  10. Nemery B. What happens to the manuscripts that have not been accepted for publication in Occupational and Environmental Medicine?. Occup Environ Med. 2001;58:604–607
  11. Polk HC. An editor’s perspective of the future for peer-reviewed traditional surgical journals. Am J Surg. 1991;161:309–311
  12. Wilson JD. Peer-review and publication (Presidential address before the 70th annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, San Francisco, California, April 30, 1978). J Clin Invest. 1978;61:1697–1701
  13. Relman AS. Are journals really quality filters?. In:  Goffman W,  Bruer JT,  Warren KS editor. Coping with the biomedical literature explosion: a qualitative approach. New York, New York: Rockefeller Foundation; 1975;p. 54–60
  14. Loonen MP, Hage JJ, Kon M. Who benefits from peer-review? (An analysis of the outcome of 100 requests for review by Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery). Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116:1461–1472
  15. Garfunkel JM, Lawson EE, Hamrick HJ, Ulshen MH. Effect of acceptance or rejection on the author’s evaluation of peer review of medical manuscripts. JAMA. 1990;263:1376–1378
  16. Opthof T, Furstner F, van Geer M, Coronel R. Regrets or no regrets? (No regrets! The fate of rejected manuscripts). Cardiovasc Res. 2000;45:255–258
  17. Amin M, Mabe M. Impact factors: use and abuse. Medicina (B Aires). 2003;63:347–354
  18. Walter G, Bloch S, Hunt G, Fisher K. Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality. Med J Aust. 2003;178:280–281
  19. Falagas ME, Zouglakis GM. Trends in the impact factor of scientific journals. [Letter] Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1401–1402
  20. Kurmis AP. Understanding the limitations of the journal impact factor. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85A:2449–2454
  21. Rogers LF. Impact factor: the numbers game. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:541–542
  22. Curti M, Pistotti V, Gabutti G, et al. Impact factor and electronic versions of biomedical scientific journals. Haematologica. 2001;86:1015–1020
  23. Gallagher EJ, Barnaby DP. Evidence of methodologic bias in the derivation of the Science Citation Index impact factor. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;31:83–86
  24. Hansson S. Impact factor as a misleading tool in evaluation of medical journals. Lancet. 1995;346:906
  25. Whitehouse GH. Impact factors: facts and myths. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:715–717
  26. Linde A. On the pitfalls of journal ranking by Impact Factor. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106:525–526
  27. Lehrl S. The impact factor as an assessment criterion of scientific achievements: the right to equal chances. Strahlenther Onkol. 1999;175:141–153
  28. Lundberg GD. The “omnipotent” Science Citation Index Impact Factor. Med J Aust. 2003;178;:253–254
  29. The PLoS Medicine Editors. The impact factor game. PLoS Med. 2006;3:e291
  30. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ. 1997;314:498–502
  31. Dong P, Loh M, Mondry A. The “impact factor” revisited. Biomed Digit Libr. 2005;2:7
  32. Citation data. The wrong impact?. Nat Neurosci. 1998;1:641–642
  33. Ioannidis JP. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA. 2005;294:218–228
  34. Frank E. Authors’ criteria for selecting journals. JAMA. 1994;272:163–164
  35. We want to publish your work. PLoS ONE Guidelines for Commenting. Available online at: http://www.plosone.org/static/commentGuidelines.action#annotation. Accessed Date: January 16, 2007.
  36. Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia. Available online at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. Accessed Date: December 3, 2006.

 See accompanying Editorial on page 677.The authors indicate no financial support or financial conflict of interest.Statistical analyses were performed by Michael G. Heckman, MS, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.

PII: S0002-9394(06)01412-7

doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.12.004

American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 143, Issue 4 , Pages 551-560.e1 , April 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution