Literature DB >> 16820657

What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.

Piyush Gupta1, Geetinder Kaur, Bhawna Sharma, Dheeraj Shah, Panna Choudhury.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To identify the characteristics of the manuscripts submitted to the Indian Pediatrics; attributes of the peer-review process and decision-making; and factors associated with their acceptance or rejection.
METHODS: All submissions to Indian Pediatrics during 2002 were analyzed by a retrospective review of records. Manuscripts were categorized by their place of origin (Indian vs. foreign), geographic region of India (north, south, east, west, central), submitting institution (teaching vs. non-teaching), subject (general pediatrics, systemic pediatrics, neonatology, genetic syndrome, allied sub-specialities, etc.), and type of article (research paper, case report, images, letter to editor, review, etc.). Manuscript details were recorded in a database that also included information on peer reviewer assignment, editorial and reviewer comments, and final disposition of the manuscript. Characteristics of accepted and rejected manuscripts were compared.
RESULTS: Indian Pediatrics received 687 manuscripts for consideration in the year 2002; mostly from Indian authors (89%). Maximum contributions were received from North India (236, 39%) followed by 165 (27%) from South, 95 (16%) from West, 90 (15%) from Central and 26 (4%) from Eastern part of India. Of 687 papers, 457 (66%) articles qualified for peer review. Agreement between the reviewers was not significantly greater than that expected by chance; kappa for inter-rater agreement was 0.35, 0.17 and 0.21 between any two sets of reviewers for 431, 228 and 203 articles, respectively (P < 0.005). Of 687 submitted manuscripts, 294(43%) were accepted, 347(50%) were rejected and no decision was possible on 46(7%) manuscripts. The top reasons for rejection were 'absence of a message', 'lack of originality', 'inadequate methods', 'not relevant to journal', 'over-interpretation of results', 'unsatisfactory writing style', 'inaccurate/inconsistent/insufficient data', and 'inappropriate statistical analysis', in that order. Median number of days (IQR) needed to reach the final decision was 81 (25-210) d; ranging from 8 (3-29.5) d for Images to 180 (90-341) d for Research papers. No preference for acceptance was noted for foreign articles, geographic region of India, type of institution, or a particular topic, on both univariate and multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSION: Indian Pediatrics is receiving contributions from all over India. Majority of the manuscripts are peer-reviewed. Of every 10 articles submitted, almost 4 are accepted. Median time interval from submission to final decision is less than 3 months. The decision-making is not influenced by the place of origin of manuscript.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16820657

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian Pediatr        ISSN: 0019-6061            Impact factor:   1.411


  5 in total

1.  "Why We Say No! A Look Through the Editor's Eye".

Authors:  Aarti Garg; Sunanda Das; Hemant Jain
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-10-01

2.  Conflict(s) of interest in peer review: its origins and possible solutions.

Authors:  Anton Oleinik
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2013-01-05       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?

Authors:  Richard L Kravitz; Peter Franks; Mitchell D Feldman; Martha Gerrity; Cindy Byrne; William M Tierney
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The validity of peer review in a general medicine journal.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Jackson; Malathi Srinivasan; Joanna Rea; Kathlyn E Fletcher; Richard L Kravitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-07-25       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews: a multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants.

Authors:  Lutz Bornmann; Rüdiger Mutz; Hans-Dieter Daniel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.