You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Editorial
QED: Quality, Education, and DialogueKeywords: education; peer review process
  1. ROGER HALL, Editor

https://doi.org/10.1136/heart.85.3.241

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    With my second year as Editor now well underway, it is perhaps timely to review the current status of the journal, recent changes, and the future plans we have for Heart.

    Quality

    Although we have increased the rejection rate of the journal to over 80%, the number of papers submitted has not decreased (currently well in excess of 1000 manuscripts a year). Hopefully the more stringent application of scientific criteria has led to an improvement in the standard of the original scientific papers accepted. I believe strongly that it is better to have a lean fit journal than a fat flabby one.

    A major factor affecting the popularity of a journal with the submitting authors is the quality and speed of the review process. This remains one of the most difficult areas for us to control. Whereas delays occurring within the editorial office (regarding allocation of papers and responding to authors once reviewers' comments have been received) have been minimised, the …

    View Full Text