Dear Reader,
Since its inception in 1990, I have always had a warm spot in my heart for the journal, Brain Pathology. It remains one of the few Neuropathology journals that truly represents the broad interests and needs of our international community. Given the solid tradition of excellence already established by my accomplished predecessors, Paul Kleihues, Clayton Wiley and Harry Vinters, I find the prospect of becoming chief editor for Brain Pathology both daunting and humbling. At the same time, it is a tremendous honor and represents an exciting challenge during this particularly rewarding time in Neuropathology. Technical advances in fields such as molecular pathology and genomics have recently hastened the rate of scientific progress, presenting challenges for staying abreast in once small areas that are now literally exploding at the seams. Furthermore, the need for better diagnostic, prognostic and predictive disease biomarkers often places the neuropathologist squarely in a central role for critical multidisciplinary studies, clinical trials and translational research overall.
Over the last 12 years, Brain Pathology has admirably served the needs of its official sponsor, the International Society of Neuropathology (ISN) and the Neuropathology community in general. It has achieved a premier status among both pathology and neuroscience journals, with a solid reputation for highly authoritative works that focus on both cutting edge basic research and practical diagnostic issues. One obvious goal is to simply maintain the high quality in categories that have made Brain Pathology so popular, such as the mini‐symposia and review articles. Over time, original research articles have similarly increased in prominence and they maintain an equally high standard of excellence, elucidating the pathogenesis of complex diseases affecting the brain, spinal cord, peripheral nerve and skeletal muscle. In addition to maintaining these proven staples of success however, I’d like to focus my first “Editorial” section on several new developments and plans that should enhance the use and visibility of our journal. I hope that you will share my enthusiastic optimism for our future and feel free to communicate any additional suggestions or concerns you might have.
JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR
In my conversations with colleagues in the Neuropathology community, it is quite obvious that the journal impact factor is an issue of universal concern and is aggravated further by its common misuse for promotion criteria and funding decisions, particularly in Europe and Asia. I plan to devote a separate editorial to an upcoming issue. Nevertheless, our impact factor recently increased to its current level of 4.041 and further gains clearly continue to be a major goal. In brief, one of the challenges for Brain Pathology is that the number of articles published each year is relatively small and therefore, we are subject to larger shifts in the impact factor than are monthly and bimonthly journals. This is further aggravated by the narrow 2 years window that the ISI utilizes for counting citations. This fairly limited time means that articles published late in the year are at a disadvantage. For rare disorders where the scientific field progresses more slowly, citations are also less likely to occur during this narrow 2 years window. Lastly, our cases of the month currently account for 20% of our articles (the denominator in the ISI formula) and as with most case illustrations, are rarely cited (the numerator). In this regard, Harry Vinters and Ron Hamilton have already taken steps to correct this issue by reclassifying these publications as correspondence. As such, they will no longer be included in the denominator, yet if cited are still counted in the numerator. In other words, this shift will hopefully convert these brief case reports from publications that lower the impact factor to ones that potentially raise it. However, as this change only occurred in 2005, we will not get a sense of the effects (albeit partial) until the 2006 impact factor for articles published in 2004 and 2005. Ultimately, the hope is that increased high quality submissions (minisymposia, reviews and research studies) will account for even greater gains. Similarly, it is worth stressing that the impact factor alone will not dictate our actions as we will strive to maintain a balance between impact factor and articles that are otherwise of great interest to our readers, yet are less likely to be cited.
EDITORIAL CHANGES AND EXPANSIONS
One of my chief concerns before accepting the post of chief editor was my recognition that I am not quite the “Renaissance man” of Neuropathology I would like to be, particularly during the current era of rapid progress. I fully accept that I am essentially “just a tumor guy”. For example, although I feel that I can still diagnose an Alzheimer’s disease with the best of them, I have definitely not kept up with the latest gene mutations defining subsets of tau‐negative frontotemporal dementia. Therefore, the natural solution is to obtain help in the subspecialties in which I am undoubtedly deficient. In this regard, I am pleased to report that we now have an outstanding team of six senior associate editors, all of whom are well‐recognized international experts in their fields of study. In addition to my own area of expertise in neoplasia, the majority of common topics are well covered using this system.
A more formal and detailed introduction of these senior associate editors will follow in the next issue. Suffice it to say however, that each of these individuals are highly committed to the ultimate success of our journal and will essentially serve as chief editor for articles submitted within their field(s) of expertise, including final decisions of manuscript acceptance vs. rejection. Similarly, if any of us decide to submit to Brain Pathology ourselves, one of the other senior editors will handle the manuscript and provide an anonymous peer review process that is identical to all other submissions. The senior editors will also assist me in soliciting stimulating minisymposia and review articles within their subspecialties. This model is similar to ones adopted by other successful journals and should not only markedly enhance the collective expertise of our editorial office, but hopefully attract a wider range of high caliber authors. Prospective authors are welcome to recommend a specific senior associate editor for their submission, although in most cases the topic of the paper makes the optimal choice fairly evident.
SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Rebecca Folkerth (Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA): Developmental, perinatal and pediatric neuropathology
Hans H. Goebel (Johannes Gutenberg‐University Medical Center, Mainz, Germany): Skeletal muscle pathology
Hans Lassmann (Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria): Neuroimmunology and inflammatory/infectious disorders
Seth Love (University of Bristol, Bristol, UK): Cerebrovascular and neurodegenerative diseases
Thomas Montine (University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA): Neurodegenerative diseases
Robert Schmidt (Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA): Peripheral nerve pathology and myelin disorders
Additional changes include the recent recruitment of Dr Josef Priller (Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany) to the editorial board. Although still a young investigator, Dr Priller has rapidly made a reputation as an outstanding and highly cited neuroscientist with expertise in a wide range of topics, including cerebrovascular disease, neurodegeneration, inflammation, stem cells and glial/microglial biology. Rotating off the editorial board are Doctors Ulrich Dirnagl, Bradley Hyman and Wolfgang Streit; their many years of service to Brain Pathology are greatly appreciated! Lastly, Dr Ron Hamilton will maintain his current position as editor of the popular “Cases of the Month”, Dr Francesco Scaravilli will continue soliciting articles for the “History of Neuropathology” series, and the relatively new “Controversies in Neuropathology” category will also continue.
PARTNERSHIP WITH BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
As you may know already, Brain Pathology recently switched from self‐publishing to Blackwell Publishing, the latter representing one of the largest society‐associated publishers hosting 805 journals and 6000 books. The team at Blackwell provides considerable support and commitment to our success, including several enthusiastic individuals that have been working closely with us. From the author’s perspective, the most notable one will be Delia Malim‐Robinson, our editorial assistant that recently took over the position from Michael Willis. Although situated across the Atlantic (Oxford, UK) from the chief editor, Mrs. Delia Malim‐Robinson will manage the entire author submission process, which has thus far been running smoothly with the electronic processing of Manuscript Central (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bpa). Although there are always advantages and disadvantages to every move, in this case, the former clearly outweigh the latter in my opinion; Blackwell has already been working diligently to increase the journal profile and readership, boost submissions and enhance author benefits. For example, the move to Manuscript Central is already reducing turnaround times (current average: 29 days from submission to first decision and 50 days from submission to final decision with goal to keep the first decision within 4–6 weeks for every paper) and the larger team of publishers/editors provides improved printing quality, a single stable website (http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/bpa) that will not change with the location of each new chief editor, and a considerably greater focus on marketing. Included in the latter are advertisements in related journals, society newsletters and scientific meetings (Neuropathology, Neuroscience, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Neuro‐Oncology, Neurovascular Disease and General Pathology), a free online subscription trial, eToC alerts (electronic table of contents), and our inclusion in future Blackwell/Synergy consortial packages, providing open access to Brain Pathology to over 5000 institutions worldwide. The most recently initiated author benefits include: (i) a copyright licensing rather than transfer form (ie, authors get to keep the copyrights to their submitted articles and figures); (ii) option for open online access of ones publications ($2500 or £1250 cost); and (iii) shorter review and publication turnaround times.
SUBMISSION STATISTICS: CAN WE EXPAND INTO A BIMONTHLY PUBLICATION?
In speaking with colleagues about Brain Pathology, a common question posed is whether or not we can increase from quarterly to bimonthly publication. Although this is clearly a desirable goal for the future, the short answer for now is no, simply because our current rate of manuscript submissions would not sustain six issues per year and our number one goal remains the high quality for which Brain Pathology is known. On average, 60 articles are being published per year and the acceptance rate over the last 3 years is 36%. Therefore, one of our main goals is to increase the volume of manuscript submissions so that this question can be revisited in the near future. In order to do that, we have been working closely with Blackwell Publishing to make it more attractive for authors to select Brain Pathology in the first place. Criteria for journal selection typically include the overall reputation of the journal, levels of efficiency for manuscript submission and review, turnaround times, the quality and costs of color reproduction and the accessibility of published articles to as many readers as possible. In most of these areas, Brain Pathology already performs admirably, although a number of initiatives have been instigated recently to improve this further. These include: the electronic submission, review, tracking and proof editing process provided by Manuscript Central; fast reviews; rapid publication times (most accepted papers are published in the next issue); affordable publication costs; and increased marketing and consortial library packages to enhance readership, article accessibility and journal reputation. Therefore, I hope that you will consider Brain Pathology as one of your first choices for publishing. Furthermore, although our journal has always been highly regarded within the Neuropathology community, it is perhaps still less familiar to colleagues in related clinical, neuroscience, and anatomic pathology subspecialties. As such, I urge you to encourage such colleagues to submit to Brain Pathology whenever you attend an exciting seminar or otherwise become aware of studies that fit well within the scope of our journal.
In closing, I would like to stress my gratitude to the ISN for appointing me to this prestigious position and to all three of the prior chief editors for their support and valuable advice. In particular, I’d like to personally thank Harry Vinters for all his hard work and commitment to excellence as editor‐in‐chief of Brain Pathology over the last 6 years, as well as for all the help he has provided me in making the editorial transition as smooth as possible. I greatly look forward to working with Blackwell Publishing, the senior associate editors, the editorial board members, and most of all, the readers and contributors to Brain Pathology.
Arie Perry, MD